**1** IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5389/2009 Sadanand Marutishet Bhingarde (since deceased through heirs) and others. ....Petitioners -VERSUS- Murlidhar Shamrao Chede. ......Respondent ........... Mr.S.M.Raikar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr.D.D.Kulkarni, Advocate for the Respondent. ........... CORAM : A.S. OKA, J. Dated : 14th October, 2009. P.C. : 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2 The Petitioners are heirs of the original Plaintiff. The suit is filed by the Petitioners for injunction. In the said suit, an application was made by the Petitioners at Exhibit-143 praying that the Petitioners may be permitted to adduce evidence in rebuttal. The said application has been rejected by the impugned order. 3 On 05th August, 2009, notice was issued by this Court. A statement of the Advocate for the Petitioners was recorded that the Petitioners intend to examine only one witness i.e. the scribe of the sale deed dated 24th August, 1994. 4 The learned counsel for the Respondent submitted that notwithstanding the fact that the Petitioners had an opportunity to **2** adduce the evidence, they have not adduced the evidence and with exercise of due diligence, the Petitioners could have adduced the evidence earlier. 5 The Petitioners are relying upon the sale deed dated 24th August, 1994. The original sale deed was got produced through a witness. In the application at Exhibit-143, the Petitioners have stated that the sale deed was filed on record of the Trial Court. There is a counter claim filed by the Respondent. In the application it is stated that due to inadvertence and bonafide mistake, rebuttal evidence was not adduced by the Petitioners. 6 It must be noted here that now the Petitioners have confined their claim to the extent of examining only one witness i.e. the scribe of the sale deed. Considering the reasons set out in paragraph No.7 of the application at Exhibit-143, the said limited request can be considered. 7 Hence, I pass the following order:- (1) Impugned order dated 18th April, 2009 is quashed and set aside and the application at Exhibit-143 is allowed only to the extent that the Petitioners will be entitled to examine the only one witness namely scribe of the sale deed dated 24th August, 1994. (2) The Petitioners will pay costs of Rs.5,000/- of this petition to the Respondent. The amount to be paid or deposited with the Trial Court within a period of eight weeks from today. (3) Petition is partly allowed in the above terms. [A.S. OKA, J.] kps