1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3960 OF 2009 (Kamalkunj Coop. Housing Society Ltd. vs. Shankar P. Thool & 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 05, 2009. Heard finally by consent of Shri Sirpurkar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents. The document exhibited in evidence of plaintiff was de-exhibited on 10.06.2009. The petitioner – plaintiff sought its review on 27.07.2009 and that was granted on 25.08.2009. Before that on 10.07.2009, the petitioner – plaintiff had sought leave to cross examine defendant. That leave was granted but as plaintiff or his counsel were absent, no cross examination was conducted. The trial Court, therefore, passed order on no cross. On 18.07.2009, the counsel for the petitioner – plaintiff did not remain present and hence matter was adjourned to 27.07.2009 for final arguments. The arguments of defendant were heard on 27.07.2009. The facts above clearly show that after arguments of defendant were heard, the application for review were allowed on 25.08.2009. Thus, document de-exhibited earlier has again been exhibited. In the 2 circumstances, this event has got bearing on cross examination of defendant. I do not find any malafides on the part of the petitioner n not cross examining the defendant. Writ Petition is allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs. 1,000/- by the petitioners to respondent No.1. The cost be paid by 17th November 2009. If the costs are so paid, the trial Court to permit the petitioner to cross examine Respondent No.1 - defendant and proceed further with adjudication in accordance with law. JUDGE *GS.