1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.586 of 2009 (Smt. Manorambai Wasudeorao Gotmare v. Harikishan s/o Hajarilal Gupta) Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's order Shri Rugved Dhore, Advocate for Petitioner. Shri H.N. Potbhare, Advocate for Respondent. Coram : R.C. Chavan, J. Dated : 18 th January, 2010 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. This petition is directed against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kalmeshwar, rejecting the application Exhibit 37 filed by the petitioner-defendant in Regular Civil Suit No.16 of 2008. In that case, the evidence of the respondent-plaintiff was recorded on 17-10-2008, but the defendant was absent. The case was adjourned to 7-11-2008 and again to 20-11-2008, but the defendant did not tender his evidence. On 20-11-2008, the arguments of the plaintiff were heard and the case was posted for judgment on 27-11-2008. On that day, the application Exhibit 37 was made, contending that the defendant was represented by one Advocate Shri Hande, who had expired – though the vakalatnama was also signed by Advocate Shri Khangare. The learned Judge observed that Advocate 2 Shri Khangare appears regularly in the his Court for other cases. The learned Judge held, relying on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Arjun Singh v. Mohindra Kumar and others, reported at AIR 1964 SC 993, that when the entire hearing is completed and the suit is adjourned only for pronouncing the judgment, Order 9, Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Code would not apply. In view of this, it cannot be said that the learned Judge erred in rejecting the application Exhibit 37. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. ` Judge pdl