1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7839 OF 2009 Bhatu Shankar Patel, age: 49 years, Occ: Business, R/o Vrundavan Colony, Nandurbar, District Nandurbar. Petitioner Versus 1 Shantilal Rikabchand Jain, age: 42 years, Occ: Business, 2 Riyajoddin Sk. Gayasoddin, age: 47 years, Occ: Business; 3 Sau.Anjana Shantilal Jain, age: 37 years, Occ: Household and Agriculture; 4 Devendra Chandanmal Jain, age: 34 years, Occ: Business; 5 Ramchandra Magan Sonar, age: years, Occ: Agriculture, Respondents No.1 to 3 are residing at Nandurbar, Vedu Govinda Nagar, Shastri Market No.2. Respondents No.4 & 5 Tilak Road, Nandurbar. Respondents Mr.M.M.Bhokarikar, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.R.Mantri, advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr.R.M.Sancheti, advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 21 st July, 2010. PER COURT: 2 1 This writ petition challenges the order dated 26.10.2009, passed by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nandurbar, below Exhibit-188 in Special Civil Suit No.07/2007. By this order, the application filed by the petitioner at Exhibit-188 for permitting him to produce the documents referred to in the application and to cross examine the witness of the defendants, has been rejected. 2 The notice in this matter was issued on 24.11.2009 and the proceedings of civil suit i.e. Special Civil Suit No.07/2007 were stayed. 3 The perusal of the order dated 26.08.2009 shows that the application of the petitioner under Order XIII Rule 2(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, for production of the document and cross examining the witness of the defendants on the basis of said document, has been rejected on the ground that the document in question is not relevant and same cannot be permitted to be produced. The order impugned is interlocutory in nature. The cross examination of defendants is going on. In view of this, I do not find any reason to interfere in the order passed by the trial Court, at this stage. It will however, be open for the petitioner to challenge the order impugned in this petition, by filing an appeal, if the decision in the suit goes against him. It is made clear that dismissal of this petition shall not come in the way of the petitioner. 4 Hence, Writ Petition stands dismissed. The trial Court is directed to proceed with the matter. (R. K. DESHPANDE) JUDGE ******* adb/wp783909