1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 4232/2010. Shri Jayantibhai Kanjibhai Makdia -: VERSUS :- M/s. Chhayadeep Construction and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : DECEMBER 09, 2010. Heard Shri R.S. Naktode, learned counsel for petitioner, Shri S. Dewani, learned Counsel for respondent no.1/caveator and Shri Kankale, learned Counsel for respondent no.5 - Nagar Parishad. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. It is apparent that in the impugned order the trial Court has found that when it passed the orders below Exh.99, it did not receive proper assistance and because of that finding it has allowed the application at Exh.105. Shri Naktode, learned Counsel has tried to contend that infact it constitutes review of the earlier order. Shri Dewani, learned counsel for respondent no.1 has attempted to show that in the impugned order 2 the trial Court has found cross examination of petitioner/ plaintiff necessary in the interest of justice. I find that the relevant material is looked into and thereafter the trial Court has allowed the application. It is apparent that when it passed orders on application Exh.99, the counsel for respondent/defendant was not available and it did not receive proper assistance. However, I find that the suit is pending since the year 2007 and prior to the impugned order below Exh.99, an application at Exh.98 was already rejected by the trial Court. In this situation, grant of cost of Rs. 500/- to petitioner is found to be too inadequate. Respondent no.1 is, therefore, directed to pay Rs. 2000/- to petitioner by 21.12.2010 before the trial Court. If the costs are so paid, the trial Court shall permit the defendant to cross examine the petitioner /plaintiff. If costs are not paid, the trial Court shall proceed further in default. In view of the above, the impugned order is modified accordingly. Writ Petition is partly allowed. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. JUDGE Rgd.