Disposed¶20

Ashwin Prabhakar Shejul and Another v. Prabhakar Gopalrao Shejul

Bombay HC10 Mar 2026WP/2599/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition No. 2599 of 2026, Bombay HC Aurangabad Bench, S. G. Chapalgaonkar J., decided 10 March 2026; disposed with innocuous direction to Trial Court to supply defendants copies of documents appended to plaintiff's affidavit-in-chief before insisting on cross-examination; challenges order dated 09.01.2026 below Exh.27 in Regular Civil Suit No.315/2023 (Civil Judge JD Aurangabad); parties father and son (Prabhakar Gopalrao Shejul v. Ashwin Prabhakar Shejul and another); certiorari sought; advocate Avinash R. Borulkar.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with an innocuous direction that the Trial Court supply the petitioners with copies of documents relied upon by the defendant and only thereafter insist upon cross-examination of plaintiff. ¶20

Ashwin Prabhakar Shejul and Another vs Prabhakar Gopalrao Shejul — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

944-wp-2599-2026.odt

¶2

(1)

¶3

2026:BHC-AUG:10699

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 2599 OF 2026

¶6

ASHWIN PRABHAKAR SHEJUL AND ANOTHER VERSUS PRABHAKAR GOPALRAO SHEJUL

¶7

Mr. Avinash R. Borulkar, Advocate for the Petitioners

¶8

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. DATED : 10^th MARCH, 2026.

¶9

P.C.:-

¶10

The petitioners approach this Court with following prayer: “C. By issuing writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction in the nature of writ, kindly quash and set aside the impugned order dated 09.01.2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge Junior Division, Aurangabad on application below Exh.27 in Regular Civil Suit No.315/2023 and consequently the application below Exh.27 may kindly be allowed.”

¶11

The respondent filed Regular Civil Suit No.315/2023 before Civil Judge Junior Division at Aurangabad seeking relief of eviction of petitioners from house and perpetual injunction.

¶12

It appears that, petitioner no.1 and respondent are son and father by relation. The evidence of plaintiff is commenced. The plaintiff has tendered his affidavit alongwith documents. At this stage, petitioners/defendants filed application seeking direction against plaintiff to provide copies of document appended to evidence affidavit and sough adjournment. Initially, Trial Court granted adjournment. On second date, similar prayer was

¶13

944-wp-2599-2026.odt

¶14

(2)

¶15

repeated. The Trial Court directed petitioners to proceed with cross-examination.

¶16

Mr. Borulkar, learned Advocate appearing for Petitioners, raises grievance that unless documents appended to affidavit-inchief are made available to petitioners, it is difficult for them to proceed with cross-examination. However, Trial Court is not giving importance to aforesaid prayer.

¶17

Considering submissions advanced, present Writ Petition can

¶18

be disposed of by giving innocuous direction. Hence, following order:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

a. Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶21

b. The Trial Court shall ensure that petitioners are supplied with copies of documents relied upon by defendant and only thereafter insist upon petitioners to proceed with crossexamination of plaintiff.

¶22

(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE

¶23

Devendra/March-2026

Ashwin Prabhakar Shejul and Another v. Prabhakar Gopalrao Shejul

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashwin Prabhakar Shejul and Another v. Prabhakar Gopalrao Shejul

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shriganesh Alias Vinod Uttareshwar Warad vs Vijaya Alias Annapurna Gururaj Thote and Others

Rahul Arjun Bhamre vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector Dhule and Others

Dadasaheb Santaram Borude vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others

Rajendra Damodhar Jagdale and Others vs the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II

Amol Gangadhar Shinde vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ankush Ramlal Pawar vs the State of Maharashtra and Another