IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3012 OF 2009 Shri Hanumant Balwant Adke ...Petitioner V/s. Vittalrao Keshav Ghatage ...Respondent ...... None present. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. MARCH 24, 2009. MARCH 24, 2009. MARCH 24, 2009. P.C. 1. None appears for the Petitioner when the matter is called out. Dismissed for non-prosecution. 2. Later on, Mr.N.J.Patil for Petitioner mentioned the matter requesting to recall the order dismissing the Petition for default on the ground that when the matter was called out, he was busy in some other Court. 3. For the reason mentioned, order dismissing the Petition for non-prosecution is recalled. : 2 : Petition is restored to file to its original number and is proceeded on merits forthwith. 4. Heard Counsel for the Petitioner. 5. The order impugned in this Petition is a discretionary order passed by the Court below at the interlocutory stage. Assuming that there is some error of jurisdiction committed by the lower Court in the impugned order, however, indubitably the same is capable of being corrected at a later stage. As observed by the Apex Court in the case of Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. reported in (2003) 6 SCC 675 reported in (2003) 6 SCC 675 reported in (2003) 6 SCC 675, in particular, in Paragraph 39, that the wrong done, if any, could be set right and the rights and equities can be adjusted in appeal or revision preferred at the conclusion of the proceedings, no interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction is warranted. Hence, dismissed. 6. Needless to observe that all questions raised in the present Petition are kept open to be agitated by the Petitioner in the appeal or : 3 : revision to be preferred against the final decision at the conclusion of the proceedings which will have to be considered on its own merits in accordance with law. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.