/ 1 / IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3767 OF 2008 Smt. Laxmibai Laxman Chavan and Others ...Petitioners vs. Smt. Laxmibai Haribhau Undare ...Respondent ---- Shri S.S. Patwardhan for Petitioner CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED JUNE 26, 2008 1. Heard the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. The Petitioner is Original Defendant, is challenging the order passed by the Trial Court. Rejecting his application for recasing the issues, which are framed by the Trial Court. The Petitioner filed an application seeking order that the following issues be framed. “7A” Do the defendants prove that the plaintiff did not comply with the terms and conditions of the said agreement dated 8.8.1988? “7B” Do the defendant prove that the plaintiff has unilaterally made additions and alterations in the agreement to sell dated 8.8.1988, and if years the what is legal effect thereof?” I have perused the issues which are framed by the Trial Court. The / 2 / Petitioner is the Original Defendant has claimed compensatory cost from the Plaintiff and the Trial Court has framed the following issues as under: “ Is Defendant Nos.2 to 6 are entitled to compensation?” In my view the Plaintiff can lead his evidence to bring on record the various acts and breached committed by the Plaintiff in compliance of the terms and conditions of the agreement and, therefore, it was necessary to frame the additional issues as claimed by the Petitioners. Hence, there is no substance on merit made by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Petition is accordingly dismissed. V.M. KANADE