1 NM-1659 PGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Notice of Motion No.1659 of 2010 IN Testamentary Suit No.4326 of 1997 White Rose Developers Pvt.Ltd. ... Plaintiff v/s. Sharanpal Balmukund Chopra ... Defendant Mr.Sharan Jagtiani with Mr.Janak Dwarkadas, Sr.Advocate i/by M/s.Wadia Ghandy & Co. for Plff. Mr.H.S. Thakkar, Senior Advocate i/by Ms.Geeta Shastri for Deft. ------ CORAM : SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 4th October, 2010 P.C. : 1.The Counsel on behalf of the Plaintiff states that first witness of the Plaintiff is being cross-examined. 102 questions have been put. The Advocate on behalf of the Defendant states that two further dates of cross- examination would be required. 2.The Counsel on behalf of the Plaintiff states that under these circumstances since the evidence is not completed even of the first witness, the earliest statement made by the Defendant at the time of the application for ad-interim relief must be continued pending the hearing of the suit because the extensive 2 NM-1659 evidence, which is being led, cannot be made to be frustrated at the last stage of the suit. 3.It is seen that the Plaintiff has submitted itself to cross-examination so soon as it was directed. It is also seen that the Defendant has extensively cross- examined the Plaintiff and requires still further extensive cross-examination. 4.The Counsel on behalf of the Defendant states that in view of the number of issues framed in the suit, a lot of cross-examination would be required. The Defendant would, of course, be entitled to cross-examine the Plaintiff to the fullest possible extent. However, it would be travesty of justice if during such cross- examination, which is almost a penultimate stage of the suit, third party rights are created. Hence the ad- interim order of injunction passed in this Notice of Motion, which was continued from time to time and which was only not continued on the last date of hearing so that the Plaintiff would submit itself to cross- examination at an early date, must be continued pending the suit. The ad-interim order of injunction dated 13th July 2010 shall, therefore, continue till the hearing and final disposal of the suit. 5.The Notice of Motion is disposed of accordingly. (SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.) 3 NM-1659