JUDGMENT Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - The petitioner who is plaintiff in Title Suit No. 52 of 2007 is aggrieved of order dated 01.12.2014 by which her application under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC has been rejected. 2. Title Suit No. 52 of 2007 was instituted by the petitioner for declaration of her right, title and interest over Schedule-A property and for a decree for confirmation of her possession over the suit land. In the pending suit an application under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC was filed on 11.08.2008 which has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 01.12.2014. 3. Mr. Anil Kumar, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that dismissal of the application for appointment of Survey Knowing Pleader Commissioner about 6 years after the application was filed is patently illegal. It is contended that the defendants have not disputed claim of the plaintiff over the suit land and, therefore, to resolve the dispute with respect to the alleged encroachment by the petitioner it was necessary to get a report of the Survey Knowing Pleader Commissioner. 4. Order XXVI Rule 9 provides that for elucidating any matter in dispute if court deems local investigation necessary a Commission of such person may be appointed for investigation and report thereon to the court. Suit instituted by the plaintiff is for declaration of her right, title and possession over Schedule-A land. Anxiety of the petitioner is that previously an encroachment case was initiated against her husband on an allegation of encroaching upon the government land, but then this is not an issue which shall to be adjudicated in the suit. Once plaintiff''s right, title and possession over the suit land are declared whether there is encroachment over the government land or not can be decided. Confirmation of possession of the plaintiff over Schedule-A property would depend on declaration of her title and this stage would come at a later stage. At the stage of execution a Pleader Commissioner may be appointed if the court deems proper and necessary. 5. No doubt the application for appointment of Pleader Commissioner has been dismissed about six years after it was filed, however, the fact remains that by now parties have closed their evidence and the suit is posted for final hearing. 6. In the above facts, no interference is required in the matter and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed at this stage.