"While adverting to the facts of the present case, it is with regard to the finding out of existence of a pathway. The suit was filed in the year 1994 and the suit was dismissed and appeal was filed in the year 1997. In the written statement filed by the defendants before the District Munsif Court, the defence was taken that no alternative pathway is available and the existence of the pathway was disputed. The plaintiff had not taken any steps for appointment of Commissioner before the trial Court and even before the Appellate Court, the present petitioner was not ready in the application for appointment of Commissioner. The District Judge has observed that the physical features might have changed. This Court is quite agreeable with the reasonings assigned by the learned District Judge that the physical features are bound to get altered due to the passage of time and even if the Commissioner is appointed at this stage, it may not be possible for him to describe the features which were available at the time of filing of the suit and the appointment of Commissioner may not be useful for the proper and final adjudication of the rights of the parties. In these circumstances, there is no necessity to dislodge the findings of the learned District Judge and the Civil Revision Petition suffers dismissal."
