1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 3317 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 3317 OF 2011 *** 1. Heard Advocate Mr. Kulkarni for Petitioner and Advocate Mr. Gunale for Respondent. The Respondent No.1/ plaintiff tendered his Power of Attorney first and that power of attorney has been cross examined. According to the present petitioner/ defendant some vital material has been brought on record in his cross examination. To get over that material, Respondent No.1/ plaintiff has then tendered his personal affidavit as plaintiff and if that affidavit is accepted and if then petitioner is called upon to cross examine him at this stage, the material on record, which has been brought in cross examination of general power of attorney will be lost. Attention is also invited to the fact that on 26th November, 2010 present petitioner moved an application 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 3317 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. for rejecting that affidavit of Respondent No.1/ plaintiff and, thereafter, the plaintiff moved application seeking leave to examine himself after his power of attorney. Reliance is being placed upon judgment of this Court in the case of "Kumudini Damodar Magar and others V/s Bhushan Damodar Magar and others" reported in 2004 BCI (O) 52, particularly paragraph 14 to point out the order in which the witnesses need to be examined. Shri Kulkarni contends that the trial Court is wrong in implying that the evidence of power of attorney can be overlooked or then explained. He contends that the impugned order shows total non application of mind and without jurisdiction. 2. Shri Gunale supports the impugned order. 3. I do not find it necessary to go into the controversy, at this Stage. The general 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 3317 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. power of attorney of Respondent No.1/ plaintiff has already entered the witness box and his cross examination is already over. The effort of Respondent No.1/ plaintiff, therefore, in subsequent affidavit or then because of answers given by him in cross examination can be evaluated by trial Court accordingly. The evidence given by power of attorney based upon his personal knowledge cannot be overlooked and hence the present petitioner can always invite attention of trial Court to the alleged game plan or to the efforts of Respondent No.1/ plaintiff to get over the adverse material. 4. Trial Court is competent to apply its mind to the present state of affairs and reach its own conclusion in accordance with law. The petitioner can always assail impugned orders of trial Court or then the conclusions so reached, if he is aggrieved 4 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 3317 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. thereby, after the final adjudication of the suit. Therefore, with that liberty, present writ petition is disposed of. No costs. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:2/05/2011. ans/3317