( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6296 OF 2010 Sashikant s/o. Ramchandra Parit .. Petitioner Versus Ramchandra s/o. Yeshwant Parit & Ors. .. Respondents Mr. M.B. Kolpe, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.T. Ghute, Advocate for the respondents. CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 16.08.2010 P.C. :- 1. By this petition the petitioner seeks to impugn order dated 17th February, 2010, rendered by the learned 2nd Jt. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Osmanabad, whereby the petitioner’s application (Exh.73) seeking leave to cross- examine the witnesses of the defendants came to be rejected. 2. Having heard Learned Advocate for the parties and on going through the entries in the Roznama of the suit (Regular Civil Suit No. 39 of 2008), it is explicit that the ( 2 ) petitioner’s advocate had sought time to cross-examine the witness on 10th June, 2010. The request was granted and the cross-examination was directed to be held on next day i.e. 11th June, 2010. On that day the advocate remained absent. Learned Civil Judge immediately scheduled further date on 14th June, 2010 for arguments of the parties. The arguments were heard as regards admission of certain documents. Though the petitioner’s advocate submitted an application on 17th June, 2010 seeking leave to cross-examine the witness on the ground that the petitioner was unable to attend due to illness and therefore could not seek adjournment; whereas he himself i.e. advocate had gone out of station, the application was rejected. 3. It does admit that there was some negligence on the part of the petitioner. Still, however, valuable right to cross-examine witness of other side cannot be taken away so lightly. The petitioner could not be deprived unless there was reason to believe that he committed serious default. Learned Judge of the Trial Court observed that the petitioner did not file written notes of arguments as called upon but had filed application seeking permission to cross-examine the ( 3 ) witness. In-fact, there is no warrant to call upon the petitioner to submit written notes of arguments. The denial of opportunity to the petitioner is improper and illegal. 5. For the reasons afore-stated the petition is allowed subject to costs of Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) payable to respondent No.4 in the Trial Court within a period of one week after appearance of the parties, as per directions of this Court. The parties shall appear before the Trial Court on 6th September, 2010 and the costs shall be paid before 13th September, 2010 and if such costs are deposited or paid to respondent No.4, then leave may be granted for cross-examination of the witness who shall be asked to remain present. The petition is disposed of. [V.R. KINGAONKAR,J.] snk/2010/AUG10/wp6296.10