wp846-11.doc 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.846 OF 2011 M/s.Mangal Murti Dev (P) Ltd .. Petitioner versus Mativar Sharma & Anr .. Respondents Mr.R.R.Sonawane for the petitioner. Mr.Ramesh Chheda for the respondents. CORAM : B.R.GAVAI, J. 2nd MAY 2011. P.C.: . The facts in the present case are identical with the facts of Writ Petition No.10293 of 2010. For the reasons recorded while allowing the said petition, the present petition is also allowed in the following terms: (a) The rule is, therefore, made absolute by quashing and setting aside the impugned order. The petitioner would be permitted to cross-examine the witnesses on behalf of the plaintiff and also examine the witnesses in support of its defence. However, it is made clear that no adjournment would be granted at the request of the present petitioners and on the dates fixed wp846-11.doc 2 by the learned trial Court and when the witness of the plaintiff is present, the counsel for the petitioner would proceed further with the cross-examination of the plaintiff's witness and also keep the defendant's witness available on the dates fixed by the learned trial Court. (b) Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the hearing of the suit and dispose the same within the period of six months from today. (c) Petition is allowed subject to costs which are quantified at Rs.5,000/-. The cost be deposited in trial Court within a period of four weeks from today. On deposit of the cost, the respondents-plaintiffs would be at liberty to withdraw the same. The deposit of the cost is pre-condition for allowing the petition. (B.R.GAVAI, J)