1 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3762 OF 2010 Mr.Otarmal Amichand Jain ...Petitioner vs. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay ...Respondent Mr.Kiran Jain i/b M/s.Kiran Jain & Co. for the petitioner Mr.Vinod Mahadik for the respondent CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : MAY 7, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Considering the narrow controversy involved in this petition, the same is taken up for final disposal at admission stage. 2 The petitioner-plaintiff has filed a suit against the respondent-Corporation challenging the action of demolition of the suit structure initiated by the respondent-corporation. An application for issuing witness summons to the two witnesses was made by the petitioner. By the impugned order, the said application has been rejected. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the suit was delayed not because of inaction on the part of the petitioner, but due to the fact that in the suit of the year 2000, written statement was filed by the respondent on 5 th March 2009. He, therefore, submitted that the Court ought not to have adopted a hyper technical approach. The learned counsel for the respondent supported the impugned order. He pointed out that the names of the two 2 witnesses were not set out by filing a list of witnesses in accordance with rule 1 of Order XVI of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code). 3 I have considered the submissions. The learned trial Judge was impressed by the fact that the suit was of the year 2000. However, he has not considered the important fact that the written statement was filed by the respondent in the year 2009. 4 Even after noticing that the provisions of Rule 1 of Order XVI of the said Code are directory in nature, the learned trial Judge has rejected the application made by the petitioner. An opportunity ought to have been granted to the petitioner to examine the said two witnesses. 5 Hence, petition is disposed of by passing the following order : i) The impugned order passed below application at Exhibit-26 is quashed and set aside and the application at Exhibit-26 is hereby allowed. ii)The petitioner shall take witness summons by hand and it will be the responsibility of the petitioner to serve the witness summons and procure the presence of the witnesses. iii)Petition is allowed in above terms. JUDGE