wp4128.11 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ WRIT PETITION NO.4128 OF 2011 DHANRAJ VYANKATRAO JADHAV AND ANR VERSUS VYANKATRAO VISHVNATH JADHAV AND ORS ... Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Wakure Sanjay A. Advocate for Respondents : Mr. R B Kale Adv for R/ 2 and 3 ... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. Dated: December 13, 2011 ... This writ petition takes exception to the order dated 30th March, 2011 passed below Exh.147 by the C.J.J.D., Ausa in RCS NO.295 of 2000. 2 Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners. He submits that the petitioners, who are original plaintiffs, were given chance to adduce further evidence on depositing costs of Rs.500/- within 14 days. However, the plaintiffs / petitioners could not deposit the said amount of costs wp4128.11 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ within the given time. Therefore, the trial Court forfeited the right of the petitioners to adduce further evidence. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioners, valuable right of the plaintiffs to adduce further evidence is taken away by the impugned order. Therefore, he submits that the impugned order may be set aside. 3 On the other hand, the learned Counsel for respondents submits that the Court below has considered the conduct of the plaintiffs. The suit has been filed in the year, 2000 and, therefore, the Court below was justified in passing the impugned order thereby forfeiting the right of the plaintiffs to adduce further evidence. 4 I have given due consideration to the rival submissions of the parties. It is true that the suit has been filed in the year, 2000. However, by delaying the proceedings in the suit, the plaintiffs are not benefited, in any manner. By prolonging the suit, the plaintiffs are wp4128.11 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ deprived of getting the relief sought for. It is true that in normal course the plaintiffs / petitioners should have deposited the costs of Rs.500/- within time. However, it would be a hyper technical view to forfeit the right of adducing further evidence merely because costs of Rs.500/- was not deposited within 14 days. Though the petitioners were under obligation to deposit the same within time, the concerned Court, should have taken liberal approach in the matter. The right of the party to lead / adduce evidence is a valuable right and, therefore, in my considered opinion, the impugned order deserves to be interfered with. 5 Accordingly, the impugned order dated 30th March, 2011 passed below Exh. 147 by the C.J.J.D., Ausa in RCS NO.295 of 2000 is quashed and set aside, subject to petitioners - plaintiffs depositing costs of Rs.2000/- in the Court of C.J.J.D., Ausa, District Latur within three weeks from today. It is made clear that unless costs wp4128.11 4 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ of Rs.2000/- is deposited by the petitioners / plaintiffs before the trial Court, this order will not take effect. Upon deposit of the amount of costs, the defendants will be entitled to withdraw the same without any condition. It is needless to clarify that the trial Court should not grant any adjournment to the parties unless there are extraordinary circumstances for the same. Petition allowed accordingly and stands disposed of. (S.S. SHINDE, J.) PLK/*