1 WP 5591.2011- [ J ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5591 OF 2011 1. Abdul Javed Abdul Saeed Shaikh Age : 42 Yrs., Occ. Agril., R/o : Kazi Galli, Ausa, Tq. Ausa, Dist. : Latur. 2. Abdul Khurdus Abdul Saeed Shaikh Age : 40 Yrs., Occ. Agril., R/o : Kazi Galli, Ausa, Tq. Ausa, Dist. : Latur. 3. Abdul Rauf Abdul Saeed Shaikh Age : 30 Yrs., Occ. Agril., R/o : Kazi Galli, Ausa, Tq. Ausa, Dist. : Latur. .... PETITIONERS V E R S U S 1. Ram S/o Tulshiram Pawar Age : 70 Yrs., Occ. Agril., R/o : More Galli, Ausa, Tq. Ausa, Dist. : Latur. 2. Vishwanath S/o Ram Pawar Age : 50 Yrs., Occ. Agril., R/o : More Galli, Ausa, Tq. Ausa, Dist. : Latur. 3. Uttam S/o Ram Pawar Age : 70 Yrs., Occ. Agril., R/o : More Galli, Ausa, Tq. Ausa, Dist. : Latur. .... RESPONDENTS 2 WP 5591.2011- [ J ] Mr. C.R.Deshpande, Advocate for the petitioners. CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 22/09/2011 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2. The Petitioners are the original plaintiffs, who had filed Suit for perpetual injunction. The plaintiffs led evidence and thereafter filed an application for accepting the document i.e. the compromise deed. The trial court passed an order stating that the said application would be decided at the time of final arguments. The said order is assailed in the present Writ Petition. 3. The notices were issued to the respondents. The respondents are served, but remained absent. 4. Mr. Deshpande, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the said application should have been decided at this stage itself. The petitioners would be in a position to take further steps depending upon the order passed on the said application. 3 WP 5591.2011- [ J ] 5. Order XIII of the Code of Civil Procedure [ For short, ‘ the Code ’ ] lays down the manner of exhibiting the documents. The scheme of Order XIII of the Code does not warrant postponment of the decision on exhibiting the document. The Court should have decided the said application on merits in stead of stating that it would be decided at the time of final arguments. 6. More over, no reasons are given for not deciding the said application at this stage. In light of the above, the impugned order passed below Exh. 100 dated 22/06/2011 is quashed and set aside. The trial court shall decide the said application Exh. 100 in R.C.S. No. 267 of 2008 on its own merits at this stage itself. 7. Rule is accordingly made absolute in above terms. No costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] KNP/WP 5591.2011- [ J ]