1 wp4495-11.sxw jpc/- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4495 OF 2011 Mr. Harbhajansingh D. Kohli .. Petitioner Versus Mr.Rajendra Kaur Jasbirsingh Sethi .. Respondent Mr. P. B. Gujar i/by Mr. P. J. Thorat for the Petitioner CORAM: MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATED : 30th August, 2011 P. C. 1. This petition preferred against the order dated 28th April, 2009 passed by the 8th Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune below Exh.33 in Special Civil Suit No 1099 of 2005, whereby the application of the present petitioner for setting aside the "no cross" order was rejected. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an old man of 72 years and he was constrained to face number of litigations, civil as well as criminal for only one transaction of dishonouring the cheque of Rs.2 lakhs. He submits that money recovery suit is filed by the Respondent-original plaintiff against the present 2 wp4495-11.sxw petitioner. An affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief was filed by the respondent in the said suit. However, the advocate, who was looking after the matter of the petitioner, expired and daughter of the Advocate who was budding lawyer could not manage to look after the proceedings and therefore, the trial Court passed an order of "no cross" on 10th March, 2008. The learned Advocate submits that in paragraph-11 of the petition, he has explained the delay in filing the application for setting aside the "no cross" order, so also the delay caused in filing this writ petition. It is submitted that due to his age, it was difficult for the petitioner to take follow up of the matter and that substantial interest of the party will be affected adversely due to the mistake of the advocate, if the opportunity to cross examine is denied. 3. It was informed that the Advocate of the applicant, petitioner herein, died in 2006. The affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief was placed on record on 1st August, 2007. 'No cross' order was passed on 10th March, 2008. The application for setting aside the 'no cross' order was filed before the Court on 11th December, 2008 and the trial Court 3 wp4495-11.sxw passed the order of rejecting the said application on 29th April, 2009. 4. Perused the impugned order passed by the 8th Joint civil Judge, Senior Division. The learned Judge rightly observed that the has failed to explain the delay of 8 months in filing the application for setting aside the 'no cross' order. The explanation given para 11 of the petition is general in nature, which can not explain the further delay of one year in filing the writ petition which is filed in June, 2011. Hence the order passed by the Trial Court cannot be faulted out. There is no merit in the petition. 5. Hence the petition stands dismissed. ( MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)