wp10799.10 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10799 OF 2010 Asad Mohiyoddin s/o Gulam Mehmood Siddiqui ...Petitioner Versus Gulam Ahmed s/o Chirag Mohiyouddin & Ors. ...Respondents ..... Mr. J.R. Shaikh, advocate for the petitioner Mr. S. G. Chapalgaonkar, advocate for respondents. ..... CORAM: B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED: 21st FEBRUARY, 2011 PER COURT:- 1 Heard advocate Shri Shaikh for the petitioner and advocate Shri Chapalgaonkar for respondents. 2 During the course of arguments, advocate Shri Shaikh pointed out that late Chirag Mohiyoddin expired in the year 1938 and the present respondent No.1 is born in 1942. According to him, in view of this position and specific defence of respondent that his mother was previously Hindu and later on was converted in Islam and then married to Shaikh Mohiyoddin, the issue as sought for vide issue A in wp10799.10 -2- application under Order 14 Rule 5 at least ought to have been framed. He contends that as the suit is for declaration of status of respondent No.1, entire controversy of whatever nature between the parties must be decided in the suit. 3 Advocate Shri Chapalgaonkar states that question of conversion is not relevant in the present matter and respondent No.1 is not going to lead any evidence before the trial court on that aspect. 4 In view of this clear submission made, it is apparent that by not framing the issue like issue (A), no prejudice is caused to the petitioner-plaintiff. 5 Hence, the petition is disposed of. No costs. ( B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) rlj/