1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 2168/2007 Pawankumar Shriram Poddar ..vs.. Madhav Ramchandra Tarar and Ors. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM: R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 17 th March, 2008 1. Heard Mr. Kaptan, learned counsel for petitioner, Ms. Joshi, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 6 and Mr. Deshpande, Advocate for respondent Nos. 8 and 9. 2. By filing this petition, the petitioner takes exception to order dated 09.04.2007 passed by Civil Judge Senior Division, Wardha in Enquiry Under Order XXII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. First Appeal No. 500/2003 is already pending before this Court, by which the trial Court's decree in Special Civil Suit No. 83/2000 is challenged. During the pendency of the aforesaid appeal, the plaintiff has died and, thereafter, the petitioners as well as respondent 2 Nos. 1 to 6 claimed to be the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff Smt. Saraswati Ganpatrao Bhoyar. This Court pleased to direct the trial Court to hold enquiry under Order XXII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure and submit findings as to who is the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff and by the impugned order, the trial Court declared respondent Nos. 1 to 6 as legal representatives of deceased plaintiff Smt. Saraswati Bhoayar. 3. It is not disputed that the finding of the trial Court regarding legal heirs and representatives of the deceased Smt. Saraswati is not final inasmuch as the petitioner can take objection to the impugned order in the above mentioned First Appeal pending before the High Court. 4. Ms. Joshi, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 6 also does not dispute that the impugned order is already submitted along with record in the pending First Appeal No. 500/2003. 3 5. The learned counsel for the respective parties agree that as the impugned order is not final and the petitioner is entitled to challenge the same by filing objection in the pending First Appeal, this petition, in my view does not survive. The same is, therefore, disposed of with no order as to costs. JUDGE kahale