1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7636 OF 2008 The Chief Officer, Jaysingpur Municipal Corporation. ..Petitioner. Versus Smt.Shantabai Maruti Raut and 2 Ors. ..Respondents. ... Mr.Vilas A. Jadhav, Advocate h/f. Mr.G. M. Savagave, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents. ... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ DATED : 8TH MAY, 2009. P.C. :- 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner. None appears for the respondents though served. 2. Respondent Nos.1 & 2 had filed a Motor Accident Claims No.27 of 2007 against the present petitioner and respondent No.3 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Jaysingpur. In the said matter, witness No.1 Smt.Shantabai Maruti Raut (Respondent No.1) came to be examined on 21st June, 2008 and the matter was adjourned to 8th July, 2008. Thereafter the matter came to be adjourned to 9th September, 2008 for taking cross of respondent No.1 on behalf of the 2 petitioner. However, on the said date, the Advocate for the petitioner could not reach the Court in time and hence he could not cross- examine respondent No.1. The Court passed the order of “No- Cross”. On the very same day, the learned Advocate for the petitioner preferred an application below Exh.30 before the Court stating therein that while coming from Sangli by Bus to Jaysingpur, there was delay and hence he could not reach the Court in time, hence the Court may recall the order of “No-Cross” and allow him to cross- examine the witness. However, the said application came to be rejected on the very same day i.e. on 9th September, 2008. Being aggrieved by the said order, this Petition has been preferred. 3. From the record, it is seen that the learned Advocate for the petitioner had appeared before the Court on the very same day albeit a little late. The distance between Sangli and Jaysingpur is approximately 50 Kms.. On account of the traffic, there was some delay in reaching the Court. He preferred an application before the Court on the very same day for recalling the order of “No-Cross”. Witness Smt.Shantabai Raut is one of the important witnesses in the matter. Hence, in my opinion in the interest of justice, it is necessary to give the petitioner a chance to cross-examine the said witness. Hence, the order of “No-Cross” is set-aside. The petitioner is permitted to cross-examine witness Smt.Shantabai Raut. 4. Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms. No order as to costs. 3 [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]