1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3687 OF 2008 (Murlidhar Rambhau Mahajan vs. Sau. Madhubala Kishor Agrawal & Anr.) 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. OCTOBER 17, 2008. Heard Shri Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioner. Having given more than three chances to defendant to cross examine the plaintiff and having noticed that the defendant did not cross examine the plaintiff and also did not pay cost, the application of defendant to recall the plaintiff has been rejected by the impugned order. While rejecting that application, the Court has made observation that after amendment of 2002 in Civil Procedure Code, there is no provision to recall the plaintiff. I find that the facts justify the order and use of its power by the trial Court cannot be labelled either as perverse or erroneous. The case was already fixed for evidence of defendant and reasons given by the defendant are that he was required to change his counsel and because of his poverty he has not paid the cost on 2 two occasions. In the circumstances, writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner – defendant is at liberty to challenge the impugned order if he is so advised, if he is required to file appeal after final adjudication. No costs. JUDGE *GS.