1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4072 OF 2010 (Vishnu Janrao Chaudhari vs. Vinod Hariram Bhivgade) 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. OCTOBER 15, 2010. Heard Shri Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Krushnarao Bhivgade, is appearing as authorized attorney of the respondent. After hearing parties, it is clear that in a suit instituted in 2002, the respondent – plaintiff closed his evidence in 2004 and thereafter in 2008 amendment to written statement to incorporate fraud has been allowed. Taking advantage of that amendment, the petitioner – defendant has attempted to further delay the disposal of Civil Suit. The trial Court has rightly found that the burden to establish fraud is upon the petitioner – defendant. Shri Bhivgade has pointed out that the respondent has already filed pursis before the trial Court stating that the evidence in rebuttal, if necessary, will be adduced. In this situation, it is apparent that the petitioner – defendant has to first adduce evidence to bring on record the alleged fraud and thereafter, if 2 necessary, the respondent – plaintiff can enter witness box to give evidence in rebuttal. For bringing his case of fraud, the petitioner – defendant is free to examine necessary witnesses. In view of the grievance made by the respondent in person, proceedings in Regular Civil Suit No. 100 of 2002 are expedited and trial Court shall attempt to decide the same as early as possible and in any case by 31st March 2011. With these directions and observations, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.