1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5659 OF 2010 (Radheshyam M. Agrawal vs. Smt. Shakuntalabai M. Agrawal & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. NOVEMBER 29, 2010. Heard Shri Radheshyam Agrawal, petitioner- in-person. The defendant in suit has filed counter claim. The first plaintiff in counter claim along with her, expired on 09.12.2006. She continued on record. Thereafter she moved an application for deleting name of the deceased – plaintiff in counter claim and by impugned order, the application has been allowed. According to the petitioner (original plaintiff in Civil Suit), the counter claim had already abated and hence the application could not have been allowed. The petitioner-in-person further contends that the trial Court did not hear him while passing impugned orders. He has invited attention to page 80 - impugned order. The impugned order mentions that the application at Exh. 227 was moved by Shakuntalabai Agrawal, present respondent No. 1, pointing out that she is only legal heir of the deceased Mangalchand. In view of registered Will 2 dated 17.03.2003, she sought deletion of name of the deceased Mangalchand. The deletion was opposed by present petitioner. The trial Court has considered all these facts and thereafter has permitted deletion of name of Mangalchand. There is no jurisdictional error or perversity in the impugned order. No case is made out warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. Writ petition is rejected. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.