1 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5605 OF 2009 Mohammed Hyder Abdul Mohid ...Petitioner vs. Meera Baksh @ Pahari s/o late Hafiz abdul Sattar ...Respondent Mr.R.K.Yadav for the petitioner none for the respondent CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : MAY 3, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner who is the original defendant. As the respondent-plaintiff was not willing to give answers to the questions put in the cross examination, on 20th September 2008 the learned Judge closed his cross examination. The learned Judge thereafter observed that as the respondent has not faced the cross examination, his evidence cannot be considered. By the impugned order dated 12th November 2008, an application made by the respondent-plaintiff has been allowed and cross examination has been permitted to be reopened. Now the petitioner will have to cross examine the respondent. The order is purely interlocutory in nature and in writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India, no interference is called for at this stage. Writ petition is rejected. 2 It is obvious that the impugned order can be challenged by the petitioner while preferring an appeal against the decree if the decree passed in the suit be adverse to the petitioner. JUDGE 2