JUDGMENT Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Tarun Varma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant/opposite parties. 2. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 23.9.2014 passed by the Additional District Judge, Gorakhpur in Civil Appeal No.43 of 2013 rejecting the application 16-Ga filed by the petitioner for issuing a Survey Commissioner. 3. It appears from the record that during the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner filed the application 16-Ga for issuing a commission for getting the property surveyed. The application has been rejected by the lower appellate court after recording a specific finding that before the trial court, there was no dispute regarding the identity of the suit property. Even no issue was framed before the trial court as to whether the suit property is part of plot no. 150 or not. In such view of the matter, the lower appellate court was of the opinion that the issuance of the Survey Commissioner, that too, at the appellate stage was not necessary. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court does not consider it proper to intervene at this stage, as the order impugned is purely an interlocutory order. In case the appeal is decided against the petitioner, it shall be open to him to challenge the impugned order alongwith the final judgement passed by the appellate court. With the aforesaid liberty, this petition is dismissed.