1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3578 OF 2009 Mohammed Hajichand Bagwan & Anr. .. Petitioners Versus Rukiyabi Nooruddin Inamdar & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Umesh Mankapure for the petitioners. Mr.Ajit G. Kenjale for respondent no.1. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 23 rd July 2009. P.C.: . Heard learned advocate for the petitioner and learned advocate for the 1 st respondent. The challenge in this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 02 nd March 2009 passed by the trial Court below application at Exhibit 93 made by the 1 st defendant. The contention of the petitioner in short is that the said application was filed by the 1 st respondent (1 st defendant) after the suit was closed for judgment. His contention is that no notice of the said application was given to the petitioner plaintiff and without hearing the 2 petitioner plaintiff, the said application has been allowed. 2. The learned advocate appearing for the 1 st respondent on instruction of the 1 st respondent states that the 1 st respondent may be permitted to withdraw the application at Exhibit 93 with liberty to file a fresh application. He states that a fresh application will be filed after giving sufficient advance notice to the petitioner. 3. In view of the statement, writ petition is disposed of by passing following order: : O R D E R : (a) The impugned order dated 02 nd March 2009 passed below application at Exhibit 93 is set aside. The said application is permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file appropriate application. If such application is filed, the same shall not be heard and decided without giving an opportunity to the petitioner of filing reply and an opportunity 3 of being heard. (b) All objections raised in the petition are expressly kept open. Fresh application, if any, filed by the 1 st respondent will be decided on its own merits. (c) As a consequence of setting aside the aforesaid order, the affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief of the 1 st respondent shall be returned to the advocate for 1 st respondent. (d) Writ petition is disposed of in above terms. (A.S.OKA,J)