Allowed

Balwant Raghunath Ghorpade v. Baban Yadu Ghorpade and Ors.

Bombay HC10 Jan 2023WP/247/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed writ petition quashing impugned orders rejecting an application to cross-examine the petitioner. Court directed appearance before trial court for cross-examination and payment of costs as a condition precedent.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 29.11.2021 and 03.01.2022 quashed; defendant directed to appear for cross-examination; costs of Rs. 5,000 payable to Kirtikar Law Library.

Balwant Raghunath Ghorpade Vs Baban Yadu Ghorpade and Ors. — Specific Performance | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

21. civil wp 247-23.doc

¶2

R.M. AMBERKAR (Private Secretary)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 247 OF 2023

¶6

Balwant Raghunath Ghorpade .. Petitioner Versus Baban Yadu Ghorpade & Ors. .. Respondent

¶7

Ms. Darshana Kambli i/by Mr. P.B. Gujar for Petitioner

¶8

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : JANUARY 10, 2023

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

1. Heard Ms. Kambli, learned Advocate for Petitioner. Perused

¶11

the record of the case.

¶12

2. By filing the present Petition, Petitioner has prayed for the

¶13

following reliefs:-

¶14

“(b) By an order of this Hon’ble Court, the order dated 29.11.2022 passed by Civil Judge, Satara in Regular Civil Suit No. 218 of 2015 be kindly quashed and set aside and further the Application dated 03.01.2022 filed below Exh. 86 be kindly allowed;

¶15

(c) That by an order of this Hon’ble Court, the Judgment & Order dated 03.01.2022 passed below Exh. In R.C.S. No. 218 of 2015 be kindly stayed.”

¶16

3. Petitioner is Defendant No. 1 in R.C.S. No. 218 of 2015. On 29.11.2021, the learned Trial Court passed an order of ‘No crossexamination’. The said order is at page No. 49 of the Writ Petition. Defendant No. 1 filed Application below Exh. 86 dated 03.01.2022 giving reasons for his absence and sought setting aside of the above

¶17

1 of 3

¶18

21. civil wp 247-23.doc

¶19

order. On the same date itself, the learned Trial Court has rejected the Application by stating that this was not the first attempt to set aside the ‘No cross’ and in the past also, such orders were passed and were set aside by the Court allowing cross-examination of the witness. Learned Trial Court has stated that in the past Defendant was also put to cost which he has not paid. In view thereof, the learned Trial Court opined that there is clear defiance of the order of the Court and in that view of the matter, the Application dated 03.01.2022 came to be rejected by the impugned order of even date.

¶20

4. At the outset Ms. Kambli, learned Advocate for Petitioner submitted that costs as directed earlier have been paid and there is no defiance of the order. That Defendant No.1 would be extremely careful in future and he should be given one final opportunity. She submitted that Defendant No. 1 be put to any terms as deemed fit so that his defence may not be shut out before the Trial Court.

¶21

5. In view of the submissions made by the learned Advocate for Petitioner, I am inclined to allow the present Petition subject to conditions.

¶22

6. In view of the above, following order is passed:-

¶23

(i) The impugned orders dated 29.11.2021 and 03.01.2022 are quashed and set aside;

¶24

2 of 3

¶25

21. civil wp 247-23.doc

¶26

(ii) Defendant No. 1 shall appear before the learned Trial Court on 16.01.2023 at 12:00 noon and shall present himself for cross-examination either on that date or any date thereafter as fixed by the learned Trial Court;

¶27

(iii) Learned Trial Court is requested to and is at liberty to fix the cross-examination according to its convenience and preferably on a day to day basis till the crossexamination of Defendant No. 1 is completed;

¶28

(iv) Petitioner i.e. Defendant No. 1 shall pay costs of Rs. 5,000/- to the Kirtikar Law Library, High Court, Mumbai which shall be a condition precedent for setting aside the impugned orders. Cost shall be paid by 14.01.2023 and receipt of the same shall be produced on record of this Petition.

¶29

7. With above direction, Writ Petition is disposed.

¶30

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

¶31

Digitally signed by RAVINDRA RAVINDRA MOHAN MOHAN AMBERKAR AMBERKAR Date: 2023.01.12 11:17:22 +0530

¶32

3 of 3

Balwant Raghunath Ghorpade v. Baban Yadu Ghorpade and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwant Raghunath Ghorpade v. Baban Yadu Ghorpade and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs. Afsari Begum Sayyed Nazir Barudkar and Anr. Vs Mr. Purshuram Suttomal Lalwani Decd Thru Lhr Harish Rahwani and Ors.

Saras Gopi Alias K Sarswathi Amma and Alias Sarasathi Gopalkrishnan Vs Bina Deegan Alias Bina Cunnigham and Alias Bina Gopi and Anr.

Shri. Nereus Manuel Rodrigues and Her/Their Lrs. and Ors. Vs Sulochana Chsl and Ors.

Shri. Mohan Mahadev Mali Vs the Chief Officer, Uran Nagarpalika Parishad , Tal Uran Dist. Raigad and Ors.

Mr. Sameer Pankaj Shah S/O Late Pankaj Shah Vs Mr Hasmukh M Visharia H/O Late Asha H Visharia

Gracy John Tone Vs the Stone Castle Chsl and Ors.