1 prod-11-wp-7830-2011.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY srj CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7830 OF 2011 Mrs. Jini S. Sethna (since deceased) through her Legal Heir .. Petitioner. V/s. State of Madhya Pradesh .. Respondent. Mr. P. K. Vyas, for the Petitioner. None for the Respondent. CORAM : G.S.GODBOLE, J. DATE : 27th SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C.: Not on board. Upon mentioning, taken on board. 1 I have heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioner. Though the Plaintiff in all the suits namely RAE Suit No.36/106/1991, 37/107/1991 and 38/108/1991 is same, the Defendants are different. It is no doubt true that the suit premises are situated in the same building and the ground for eviction atleast for bona fide requirement is same. However, there was no formal order of clubbing the hearing of the suits either 2 prod-11-wp-7830-2011.sxw administrative or judicial. 2 In this view of the matter, though the decision on the question of bona fide requirement and comparative hardship, may have some bearing on the other suits and vice versa; on that ground alone, the discretionary order passed by the learned Judged of the Trial Court refusing to club the hearing of remaining two suits namely Suit Nos.37/107/1991 and 38/108/1991 cannot be interferred with at this stage. The Writ Petition is disposed off. 3 However, this order will not preclude the Petitioner from moving the Learned Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes for passing appropriate administrative order for clubbing all the suits together and if such application is made, same shall be considered by the Chief Judge on its own merit without being influenced either by the impugned Order or order in this Writ Petition. (G.S.GODBOLE, J.)