KBP 7731-09.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7731 OF 2009 Ramchandra Ganpati Chavan and anr. ..Petitioner Vs. Bhupa Babu Pakhare ..Respondent ......... Mr.S.S.Patwardhan, for petitioner. ......... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.. DATE : 15 th SEPTEMBER, 2009. P.C. : 1] Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. 2] The petitioners are the original plaintiffs. The challenge in this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to an order of the trial court, by which the additional issue of maintainability of suit has been framed. 3] Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned order has been passed at a stage when the final argument of the suit was being heard. He, therefore, submitted that while deciding the issues which are already framed, the trial court can consider the issue of maintainability. His submission is that the result of the impugned order will be delaying in the disposal of the suit. 4] After having considered the submissions, I find that no case for interference is made out in this Writ Petition. By the impugned order, the issue of maintainability has been framed on the basis of contentions raised in KBP 7731-09.sxw 2 the written statement of the respondent. The impugned order records that the parties have filed their “evidence close purshis” in the suit. Under the impugned order, the trial court has not permitted the respondent to lead further evidence. The court has exercised the power by framing additional issue. As the Court has not permitted the respondent to lead the additional evidence, there will be no prejudice to the petitioner. 5] Subject to what is observed above, the Writ Petition is rejected. ( A.S.OKA, J. )