wp11453.10 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 11453 OF 2010 Mohammed Azeem Moh. Hakeem ...Petitioner Versus Radhabai @ Rajubai Dasa Kasutre and another ...Respondents ..... Dr. Kalpalata Patil-Bharaswadkar, advocate for the petitioner ..... CORAM: S. S. SHINDE, J. DATED: 20TH DECEMBER, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 This writ petition is directed against the order dated 19.10.2010 passed by the learned civil Judge, Senior Division, Hingoli, below Exh. 54 in special Civil suit No. 13 of 2008. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner agitated only one point that the application filed by the petitioner should have been disposed of by the learned trial court instead of keeping the said application for hearing at the time of final arguments. According to the counsel for the petitioner, such order is impermissible. The trial court either should have allowed the application or rejected the same on merits. There is wp11453.10 -2- no use to hear the said application at the time of final argument. 3 Upon hearing counsel for the petitioner, in my opinion, the learned Judge should have heard and decided the application filed by the petitioner Exh.54 one way or the other on merits. From the prayer made in the application, it seems that the said application is filed for exhibiting certain documents. Therefore, if such application is heard and decided at the time of final arguments, practically it would not be possible for the court to reverse back to the situation and accept the said document. Therefore, in my opinion, the trial court is not correct in observing that the application below Exh.54 filed by the petitioner to be heard at the time of final argument. 4 Therefore, without observing anything on merits of the said application, suffice it to say that the trial court was obliged to hear and decide the application below Exh.54 filed in Special Civil Suit No. 13 of 2008 and then further proceed with the hearing of the Special Civil Suit No.13 of 2008. 5 In the light of the above observations, the impugned order dated 19.10.2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hingoli passed below Exh.54 in Special Civil Suit No.13 of 2008, is quashed and set aside. The trial court is directed to hear and decide the wp11453.10 -3- application Exh.54 and pass appropriate orders on merits after hearing the parties to the said application. 6 It is informed across the bar by counsel for the petitioner that the next date in the suit is 22.12.2010. In that eventuality, in the fitness of things, it would be proper for the trial court to hear the application Exh. 54 on 22.12.2010 itself or on the very next date, which is to be fixed by the trial court and decide the said application on merits, after hearing the respective parties. The writ petition is allowed in the above terms. 7 Office to issue copy of this order to the parties concerned, duly authenticated by the Sheristedar of this Court. ( S. S. SHINDE. J.) rlj/