1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7576 OF 2009 Pandit Nanabhau Molak & Ors. ...Petitioners vs. Balasaheb Baburao Tapkir & Ors. ...Respondents Ms Krushali Tapkir for the petitioners None for the respondents CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : OCTOBER 9, 2009 P.C. 1 By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners who are the original plaintiffs have challenged the order passed by the trial court on 8th August 2009 by which the order of No Cross passed by the trial court against the respondents-defendants has been set aside and the respondents-defendants have been permitted to cross examine the petitioners and their witnesses. 2 The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the order impugned has been passed at the stage when the trial court ought to have delivered Judgment as the arguments are already concluded. Inviting my attention to the averments made in the application on which impugned order has been passed, she submitted that no ground was made out by the respondents-defendants for showing any indulgence. 2 3 After having considered the submissions, I find that no case for interference is made out. The order of No cross was passed on 20 th July 2009. The application on which impugned order has been passed was filed by the respondents on 27th July 2009. The result of the impugned order is that the respondents-defendants will be entitled to cross examine the witnesses examined by the petitioners. Hence, this is not a case to interfere in extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, the Trial Court will have to ensure that the recording of evidence is not delayed and the respondents promptly cross examine the witnesses examined by the petitionerss. 4 Subject to what is observed above, writ petition is rejected. JUDGE