1 WP 2229/2011 abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2229 OF 2011 Jayant Marutirao Babar .. Petitioner V/s Hanumantrao Shankarrao Patil .. Respondent Mr. V.S. Talkute for the petitioner. Mr. S.R. Karpe for the respondent. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 21ST JULY 2011 P.C. : 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. 2. Mr. Karpe waives service for the respondent. 3. Heard counsel for the parties. 4. The petitioner is the original defendant and the respondent is the original plaintiff. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as the plaintiff and the defendant respectively. In a suit for recovery of money, the plaintiff examined himself as a witness in the suit as P.W.1. His cross examination was concluded on 19th March 2010. Thereafter on 26th March 2010, the plaintiff produced 4 bill books and proved those bill books by 2 WP 2229/2011 examining other witnesses. Thereafter the defendant made an application for recalling of the plaintiff for further cross examination. By the order dated 7th January 2011, the application was rejected. That order is impugned in this petition. 5. Learned counsel for the defendant (petitioner) submitted that since the bill books were produced after the conclusion of the cross examination of the plaintiff, he could not cross examine the plaintiff regarding the bill books. The trial Court therefore ought to have allowed the application for recall of P.W. 1 for further cross examination. In my view, the submission is meritorious. If the production of documentary evidence was allowed by the Court after cross examination of the plaintiff and the defendant sought an opportunity of further cross examination of the plaintiff on those documents, the trial Court ought to have allowed the request, otherwise the evidence would go in without the defendant having an opportunity of cross examining the plaintiff on those documents. 6. In the circumstances, the petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the defendant's application for recalling the plaintiff for further cross examination is allowed. It 3 WP 2229/2011 is however clarified that the further cross examination, on recall, shall be restricted to the 4 bill books and/or any other documents which might have been produced by the plaintiff after 19th March 2010 when his cross examination was closed and any matter incidental thereto. Rule is made absolute to the extent indicated above. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)