ANANDRAO Vs. PRASHANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the petition by consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties.

(2.) This writ petition challenges order dated 7.4.2014, passed below Exh.72, by the learned Civil Judge Junior Division, Zari-Jamni, District Yavatmal, in Regular Civil Suit No.13 of 2013, whereby the application filed by the petitioners/defendants for grant of permission to cross-examine the respondents/plaintiff's witness No.1 was rejected on the ground that the circumstances in the suit were such that it would be abuse of process of law if the petitioners/defendants are granted permission to proceed with the trial and cross-examine the witness at their leisure and pleasure. Learned trial Judge found that there was no sufficient reason to grant the permission to the petitioners/defendants for crossexamination of the respondents/plaintiffs. The impugned order was passed under the circumstances that examination-in-chief of the witness examined on behalf of the respondents/plaintiffs was complete on 21.10.2013 and thereafter the petitioners/defendants adopted tactics of repeating applications seeking adjournment of the trial.

(3.) According to the learned counsel appearing for the respondents/plaintiffs, such applications for adjournment were granted on 8.11.2013, 29.11.2013 and 20.12.2013. However, on 17.1.2014 such application (Exh.68) for adjournment was rejected and cross-examination was closed.