1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10110 OF 2010 The Junior Engineer Suhas Shankarrao Misal and another ...Petitioner Versus Gayabai Annabhau Chole ...Respondent ..... Mr. S.B. Kakade, advocate for the petitioners Mr. S.V. Mundhe, A.G.P. for respondent ..... CORAM: S. S. SHINDE, J. DATED: 30TH NOVEMBER, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 Since the respondent is represented by the counsel and he has no objection to dispose of this matter, with consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal. 2 This writ petition takes exception to the order dated 24.9.2010 passed by the learned C.J.S.D. Majalgaon below Exh.60 in in Special Civil Suit No.13 of 2009. 2 3 The petitioners herein filed an application for recalling the witness and to cross examine him. One Mr. Suryabhan Sopanrao Ghuge was cross examined on behalf of the plaintiff. On the scheduled date, advocate for the petitioners herein could not cross examine Mr. Suryabhan Sopanrao Ghuge since the advocate was suffering from some ailments and he was not present in the Court and therefore, the application was filed on 27.8.2010 thereby praying that Mr. Suryabhan Sopanrao Ghuge may be called and the counsel for the petitioner may be allowed to cross examine the said witness. It appears that the matter was fixed on 24.9.2010. On the said application, which was filed by the petitioners herein, counsel for the original plaintiff has recorded his no objection in allowing the said application subject to payment of costs of Rs.1000/-. However, the trial court rejected the application of the petitioner to cross examine the witness of the plaintiff on the ground that the advocate did not appear on the schedule date for cross examination of the said witness and has not filed any medical certificate about ailments. Therefore, the said application was rejected on 24.9.2010. Being aggrieved by the said order, this petition is filed. 4 Counsel appearing for the respondents fairly invited my attention to the stand taken by the plaintiff before the court below and submitted that even before the trial court, the plaintiff did not object for allowing the application subject to payment of some costs. Counsel for the petitioners has no any hesitation to pay the reasonable costs amount. 3 Therefore, on the above backdrop, the impugned order dated 24.9.2010 is quashed and set aside. The petitioners herein are directed to deposit an amount of Rs.5000/- before the trial court within one week from today. After the costs amount is deposited before the trial court, the trial court, as per the convenience of the witness, who is to be summoned for cross examination, fix a date and permit the advocate for the petitioners to cross examine the concerned witness. The writ petition is allowed to above extent and disposed of. 5 Office to issue copy of this order to the parties concerned, duly authenticated by the Sheristedar of this Court. ( S. S. SHINDE. J.) rlj/