1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2496 OF 2009 Ilyas Ahmed Hasanmiya. ..Petitioner. V/s. Bhau Ghadekar & anr. ..Respondents. Mr.Javeed Hussein for petitioner. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J DATE : MARCH 16, 2009. DATE : MARCH 16, 2009. DATE : MARCH 16, 2009. P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : 1. Heard Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. The grievance of the Petitioner is that, the fact recorded by the Court below- that the defendant had closed his evidence, as mentioned in the Order dated 14th January, 2008, is incorrect and wrong. The fact so recorded will bind this Court. If the Petitioner has had any grievance about the correctness of that fact, ought to have approached the same Court immediately after 14th January, 2008. 3. According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, such application was made. If so, the order passed on that application has not been challenged before this Court. In any case it is well established position that the fact recorded by the 2 Court about the events unfolded during the trial will have to be treated as final unless recalled by the same Court, on application filed by the party aggrieved by such record. Correctness of that fact cannot be put in issue before the superior Court. 4. Thus understood, no infirmity can be found with the view taken by the Court below that the Defendant himself having closed his evidence- which fact has been noted in the evidence as per the usual practice of that Court, the question of permitting the defendant/applicant to issue witness summons does not arise. In any case, even if there is some error committed by the Trial Court in the procedure followed by it, that is a matter, which can be corrected in appeal against final decision of the Trial Court, if the Petitioner is required to file one. That is observed by the Apex Court in the case of Surya Dev Rai v/s. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. Surya Dev Rai v/s. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. Surya Dev Rai v/s. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. reported in (2003) 6 SCC 675, reported in (2003) 6 SCC 675, reported in (2003) 6 SCC 675, in particular, in paragraph 39, that the wrong done, if any, could be set right and the rights and equities can be adjusted in appeal or revision preferred at the conclusion of the proceedings, no interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction is warranted. Hence, dismissed. 3 5. Needless to observe that all questions raised in the present Petition are kept open to be agitated by the Petitioner in the appeal or revision to be preferred against the final decision at the conclusion of the proceedings which will have to be considered on its own merits in accordance with law. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J)