ANITA ANOSH SHROFF Vs. J M CONSTRUCTIONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petition was finally heard as per the order dated 6th April, 2010. The submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties were fully heard on 22nd April, 2010. The Petition was adjourned to 23rd April, 2010 for Judgment. The Petition was shown on board on 23rd April, 2010 under the caption "Judgment". When the petition was called out, a learned counsel appeared for the petitioner who had not appeared at the time of hearing. It appears that after the petition was closed for judgment, the said counsel was briefed by the petitioner without informing him that the petition was fixed for judgment. The learned counsel has tendered apology. The petitioner by filing an affidavit dated 27th April, 2010 has tendered an apology. It is not necessary to deal with the said matter any further in as much as the Petitioner has filed the aforesaid affidavit setting out the circumstances under which she engaged another counsel. The Petitioner has tendered an unconditional apology. The apology is accepted.

(2.) BY this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the challenge is to be orders dated 22nd January, 2010, 22nd February, 2010 and 26th February, 2010 passed by the learned Judge of the Court of Small Causes.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the first Respondent supported the impugned orders and submitted that an opportunity was already granted to the Petitioner to cross-examine the second Respondent and hence merely because certain answers are given by second Respondent which may be against the Petitioner, now the Court cannot permit further cross-examination. He submitted that nothing prevented the Petitioner from leading evidence before the Trial Court and therefore the trial Court was justified in closing the evidence. The learned Counsel appearing for the third Respondent also supported the impugned orders.