1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7276 OF 2009 1] Baban S/o Rama Borde 2] Ashok S/o Baban Borade 3] Dilip S/o Baban Borade 4] Pathan Ismail Khan 5] Pathan Yunus Khan 6] Ankush S/o Naryan Ajbe 7] Sudan S/o Bhimrao Zinjurke, Through Power of Attorney for Appellant Nos. 4 to 6 Baban S/o Rama Borade, All Age Major, Occu. Agril, All R/o Dhamangaon, Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed. ....Petitioners. Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra, Through Government Pleader High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad. 2] The Collector, Beed, Dist. Beed 3] The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Zilla Parishad, Beed. ....Respondents. Shri. D.R. Jayabhar Advocate for the Petitioners. 2 Shri. K.M. Suryawanshi, A.G.P. for the respondents 1 & 2.. CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 16th June 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. In the present petition petitioner challenges order dated 25/03/2009 passed by the District Judge, Beed. By this order the application filed by the petitioner for placing on record the copy of 7/12 extract, Award and E statement, has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner / Plaintiff has filed such application after his evidence is over. 2. Notice in this matter is issued on 10/11/2009. The parties are served, the learned A.G.P. Appears for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Though the respondent No. 3 is served non appears for him. With the consent of the parties. The matter is heard finally . Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 3. It is the fact that evidence of plaintiff / petitioner is over and learned counsel for the plaintiff / petitioner makes a statement that pursis has also been filed for closing the evidence. He further submits that the plaintiff /petitioner be permitted to produce the documentary evidence to prove the same. 3 4. After going through the order which is of interlocutory nature, I do not think that any interference under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution is required. However, if at all the petitioner is aggrieved by the interlocutory order and ultimately suit is decided against the plaintiff / petitioner, then it will be open for him to challenge the same on the grounds which are raised in this petition. With this observations, the petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. [ R.K. DESHPANDE, J. ] SDM*7276.09WP(J)