1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO.2976 OF 2008. (NANDKISHOR RADESHYAMJI JAJODIYA Vs MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, WARDHA.) _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Shri K.R.Lule, Advocate for Petitioner. Shri Abhay Sambre, Advocate for Respondent. CORAM : A.B.CHAUDHARI, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 09, 2008. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. An order refusing to grant an application to deliver interrogatories is under challenge in the present writ petition. 3. I have gone through the plaint. From reading whereof, I find that some portion of the house of the petitioner was demolished on the ground that the same was unauthorised construction. According to the petitioner/plaintiff, the construction could not have been demolished and therefore, he claimed damages in the suit. Now, by delivering interrogatories the petitioner sought documentary evidence pertaining to sanctioned map of some other 2 residents of the town so also the documents pertaining to the width of the road. Perusal of the plaint nowhere shows any such related pleadings nor I find that such a demand, by way of interrogatories, can be said to be in furtherance of the case of the petitioner. The leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had already approached the authorities under RTI Act for the said information but then that has not yet been furnished. 4. The petitioner is at liberty to take such steps, if aggrieved by such inaction to furnish the information, but that is separate issue with which I am not concerned. It cannot be said that the impugned order is wrong or illegal. 5. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. 6. The suit is expedited. JUDGE RR.