1. - By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 01.07.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ladnu (for short 'the trial court' hereinafter), whereby the application preferred by the respondent-plaintiff under Order 39, Rule 7 CPC for appointing Commissioner has been allowed.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant has contended that the Commissioner cannot be appointed by the trial court for collecting evidence. It is further contended that the petitioner is raising construction on his property only and not encroaching over the property of the plaintiff and, therefore, it was not required by the trial court to appoint the Commissioner for inspection of the petitioner's property.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while placing reliance on the decisions of this Court in Parmeshwari Devi (Smt.) v. Addl. Civil Judge, Bikaner & Ors., reported in 2008 (3) DNJ (Raj.) 1506 and Prema Ram & Ors. v. Smt. Narmada Kunwar, reported in 2012 (3) DNJ (Raj.) 1725 , has argued that this Court has categorically held that the Commissioner cannot be appointed for the purpose of collecting the evidence, whereas in this case, the learn