1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1614 of 2008 Shrikrishna Narayan Dandawate & ors .. Petitioners versus Shri Shaikh Abdul Rehman Babumiyan .. Respondent ... Ms.Manjiri Parasnis i/b G.S.Godbole for the petitioners. Mr.A.B. Avhad for respondent. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED : 12th August 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. In my opinion, the trial court has justly exercised discretion in favour of the defendant. Having regard to peculiar facts of the present case stated in paragraph no.5 of the impugned judgement, no interference in that behalf is warranted. Learned 2 counsel for the petitioner however strenuously relied on the decision of the Apex Court appended to the writ petition at page nos.41 to 60. The broad proposition of law spelt out in those decisions cannot be disputed. However, in the present case, the lower court has recorded sound reasons to show indulgence to the respondent defendant while allowing the application Exhibit.40. 3. No interference with the discretionary order so passed by the lower court is warranted in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Even if this petition was to be dismissed, the respondents are willing to pay further additional costs to the petitioner upto Rs.1,000/- besides the amount already awarded by the lower court. 4. In the circumstances, this petition is dismissed. Assurance given by the respondent through counsel that further cost of Rs.1,000/- in addition to the cost awarded by the lower court will be paid to the petitioner within two weeks from today is accepted. 5. Ordered accordingly. 3 (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)