IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5307 OF 2008 Shri Sahebrao Martand Yeole ...Petitioner Versus Mayadevi Rahulkumar Yeole & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mrs.V.S.Dighe for Petitioner. None for Respondents. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. AUGUST 7, 2008. AUGUST 7, 2008. AUGUST 7, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. I see no reason to depart from the opinion recorded by the Court below that the order dated 18th October 2005 passed on Exhibit 28 praying for similar relief having been allowed to become final, the question of entertaining present Application Exhibit 39 does not arise. For, no new discovery of important matter of fact or error apparent on the face of the record was pointed out in the : 2 : present application. The argument of the Petitioner that in the earlier order, the only reason recorded was that TILR cannot be appointed as Court Commissioner for collection of evidence and it was not decided on merits. The argument clearly overlooks that, that is the reason for which the earlier application has been rejected, which opinion of the Trial Court was allowed to become final. 3. At this interlocutory stage, therefore, the view taken by the Trial Court on Exhibit 39 is appropriate. Hence, no interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction is warranted. Dismissed. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.