1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5054 OF 2009. ( Surendra Singh Gutuduttasingh Ghatorode and another -: versus :- Ramesh Ramniwas Modi ) 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 : NOVEMBER 21, 2009. Heard Shri Dara Singh J. Sindhu, learned counsel for petitioners/defendants and Shri R.R. Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent/caveator/plaintiff. After the parties argued the matter finally and case was closed for judgment, application under Order XIV Rule 5 was moved and issue about status of plaintiff or his locus to maintain the suit was sought to be raised. Court below has rejected that application. Learned counsel for petitioners contends that in evidence the document came on record which disclosed that payment to petitioner was through the account of the firm. Because of this late disclosure, application was moved and specific issue was sought. He further argues that the trial Court has in impugned order already recorded some findings in this respect. 2 Learned counsel for respondent states that the material was on record and parties have addressed the court finally, as such there was no point in moving application under Order XIV order 5 and as that application was moved, while deciding that application some observations have been made. It is apparent that, the trial Court has already closed the matter for judgment after hearing the arguments. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter in writ jurisdiction. So far as the findings recorded by the trial Court are concerned, petitioners have invited those findings and it cannot be said that those findings as recorded are unnecessary. With liberty to petitioners to challenge the said order, after final adjudication if occasion therefor arises, Writ Petition is disposed of, with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rgd.