1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3957 OF 2010. Arvind Sitaram Kherde and others. -: VERSUS :- Sandeep Madhukarrao Kherde and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 06, 2010. Heard Shri S.A. Marathe, learned counsel for petitioners and Shri R.S. Parsodkar, learned Counsel for respondent no.1. Trial Court has after considering the medical certificates on record permitted respondent / plaintiff to cross examine defendant and also to further complete his evidence. Shri Marathe, learned counsel has produced those medical certificates on record. The certificate show that from 04.03.2008 the respondent / plaintiff was undergoing treatment as outdoor patient from AIIMS Hospital. Certificate dated 10.11.2009 shows that he has suffered heart attack and he was admitted in the hospital. A receipt issued by the AIIMS dated 09.10.2009 shows that he paid amount of Rs. 1,30,000/- for some treatment. The respondent has been shown as Angiography patient therein. 2 Shri Parsodkar, learned Counsel has attempted to demonstrate to this Court the nature of dispute between the parties and he has further contended that the order passed by the trial court is not without jurisdiction. I have perused the application on which the impugned order has been and also the reply thereto by the petitioners. Petitioners are uncles of plaintiff and it is not their case that during this period, respondent / plaintiff was coming to Nagpur or was contacting his Advocate or was moving around at Akola. In this view of the matter, I do not find any perversity or jurisdictional error. Writ Petition is therefore, not entertained. However, the petitioners are permitted to challenge the impugned order, after the suit is finally decided, if occasion therefor arises. No costs. JUDGE Rgd.