Majid Khan Pathan Khan Pathan v. Ahmed Khan Maheboob Khan

32-WP-2487-18 (group).odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2487 OF 2018 MAJID KHAN PATHAN KHAN PATHAN

VERSUS

AHMED KHAN MAHEBOOB KHAN WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2505/2018 MAJID KHAN PATHAN KHAN PATHAN

VERSUS

ATAUL RAHEMAN FAZALE REHEMAN DIED LRS SHAFIY ABEE ATTAUL RAHEMAN AND OTHERS AND WRIT PETITION NO.2526/2018 MAJID KHAN PATHAN KHAN PATHAN

VERSUS

AJIJ UL REHMAN FAZLE RAHEMAN DIED LRS RABIYABI AZIJUL REHMAN AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for the petitioners : Shri M.A.Manjramkar Advocate for the respondent : Shri A.L.Shaikh h/f.Shri G.M.Patel. AGP for Respondent/State : Shri S.K.Tambe ...

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

DATED : 26th March, 2018.

...

PER COURT :- 1] In all these three petitions, the petitioners/plaintiffs are aggrieved by the order of the Trial Court insisting that the plaintiffs should lead evidence as the suits are above 6 years old.

32-WP-2487-18 (group).odt 2] Contention of the petitioners is that they intend to file an application under Order XVIII Rule 1 and 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the C.P.C.) seeking a direction from the Trial Court to order the defendants to lead evidence first. In the matter of Zainabee Vs. Shivkumar, W.P. No. 781 of 2003, decided on 15/09/2017, this Court has taken a view that no such application can be made for seeking a direction to the other side to step into the witness box and lead evidence. Order XVIII Rule 1 of the C.P.C. only enables a particular litigant to file an application contending that he/she desires to lead evidence first.

3] At this juncture, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that he desires to withdraw these petitions on instructions.

4] Considering the above, these petitions are disposed of as withdrawn.

(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) shp/-