(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 2427 OF 2011 Shahabuddin s/o. Umarao Sayyed, Age : 42 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Patsangwi, Taluka : Bhoom, .. Petitioners District : Osmanabad, (Original defendants) & another versus Shaukat s/o. Kachru Sayyed, Age : 25 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Patsangwi, Taluka : Bhoom, District : Osmanabad, At present Anjangaon, Taluka : Mahada, .. Respondent District : Solapur. (Original plaintiff) ....................... Mr. S.B. Rohile, Advocate, for the petitioners. ........................ CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 28TH MARCH 2011 (2) COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard Adv. Mr. S.B. Rohile, for the petitioners / original defendants. 2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 7-9-2010, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhoom, below Exhibit 161 in Regular Civil Suit No. 259/1991, thereby rejecting the application filed by the petitioners for recalling the plaintiff's witness. 3. After 11 years, recall of one witness is sought by contending that witness produced was not the person supposed to be examined but somebody else has impersonated. The contention is, knowledge was gathered by petitioner / defendant after change of Advocate. 4. The suit is of the year 1991 and said person was examined by plaintiff in the year 1999. There is nothing on record even to prima facie show that woman then examined by the plaintiff was not Khairunbee. 5. I am, therefore, not inclined to interfere at this stage in this jurisdiction. (3) 6. With liberty to the petitioners / defendants to challenge the impugned order after the suit is finally decided, if occasion therefor arises, present petition is disposed of. No costs. ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp2427