Lsp IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8471 OF 2008 Vikramsingh Harneksingh Kalyan ..Petitioner V/s. Manjuben Vijay Patel ..Respondent Mr. Anil R. Mishra for the petitioner. Mr. P.J.Thorat i/by R.A.Thorat for respondents CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. DATED DATED DATED : 5TH JANUARY, 2009 : 5TH JANUARY, 2009 : 5TH JANUARY, 2009 P.C. . Heard Counsel for the parties. The short question that needs to be addressed in the present petition is whether the plaintiffs would be entitled to lead evidence in rebuttal to issue no .2 and additional issue only after the evidence of the defendant in the context of those issues is adduced. Counsel for the Respondent in all fairness accepts that the burden is on the defendant to lead evidence in the context of issue no .2 and additional issue framed on 14th October, 2008. If so, it is appropriate that the plaintiff is permitted to lead evidence in rebuttal in relation to the said issues only after the evidence of defendants is recorded. It is well established that in such a case, the plaintiff may not be called upon to first lead his evidence in rebuttal in relation to matters asserted by the defendants. Counsel for the Respondent submits that the order which is impugned in this petition does not call 2 upon the plaintiff to lead evidence in rebuttal in the first place. Be that as it may, it is clarified that plaintiff will be free to produce evidence in rebuttal in relation to issue no.2 and additional issues framed on 14th October, 2008 "only after" the defendant has adduced his evidence in that behalf. The order impugned in this petition is clarified to the above extent and petition is disposed of on above terms. [A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.] [A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.] [A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.]