- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8769 OF 2007 ... Talera Cars Pvt.Ltd. ..Petitioner v/s. Shri Dalichand Khushalchand Rathod & ors. ..Respondents ... Mr.Madhav Jamdar for the Petitioner. Mr.R.G.Ketkar for the Respondents. ... CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA , J. DATED: 24TH NOVEMBER, 2008 P.C.: 1. The Petitioner has challenged the order dated 14-9-2007, whereby the Plaintiff’s application to lead evidence is allowed and thereby earlier order dated 31st March, 2007 was set aside. The suit is for declaration that the Plaintiff is a tenant. Therefore, it appears from the record that by one way or other the Plaintiff is trying to delay the proceedings. There are various orders passed on record whereby the court has granted time to the Plaintiff. All intention of the Plaintiff was to delay the proceeding. 2. Any how, without observing anything on the merits of the matter, as the Plaintiff’s evidence is essential to adjudicate the issue and therefore in - 2 - the interest of justice to avoid further delay, I am declined to pass any order under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, being interlocutory order. However, it is for the court to consider the conduct of the parties and pass appropriate order, if the case is made out. The delaying tactics is being need to be curtailed. Therefore, the petition is dismissed without observing on merits of the matter. However, this is subject to costs of Rs.3000/- to be paid, by the Plaintiff to the Petitioner, within a period of two weeks as a condition precedent. The parties to co.operate and the suit be disposed off preferably within six months from today. Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)