1. By this petition the petitioner has challenged order dated 21.7.2004 passed by the Vth Civil Judge, Class II, Rewa in Civil Suit No. 31-A/ 2003 rejecting the application of the petitioner filed under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC for appointment of Commissioner.

2. The counsel for the petitioner stated that since the dispute pertaining to Khasra No. 538/3, 539/1 owned by the petitioner plaintiff Suryabhan Singh who claimed to be in possession of the same, respondent No.2 Rambahore Singh challenged the possession in his written statement as well as the ownership and some portions of the said Khasra. Hence the petitioner filed an application for appointment of Commissioner which was essential under the circumstances to resolve the dispute. Relying on Nagpur L.J. 1953 Note 230, as well as Hari Charan v. Ghanshyam Das [MPWN 1988 (2) 23 and Vimla Devi (Smt.) v. Smt. Shanti Bai [MPWN 1999 (1) 193] whereby this Court has held that when there was controversy raised regarding the plaint map and not resolved, interference could be made by the Court and when there was no agreed map filed, identity of disputed land disputed, encroachment also denied the appointment of the local Commissi