Tanaji Dattaram Chari @ Tanaji Dattaram Mandrekar And ANR., v. Kishor Shantaram Shetmandrekar And 2 ORS.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO.1110 of 2017 1.

Shri Tanaji Dattaram Chari @ Tanaji Dattaram Mandrekar, S/o late Shri Dattaram Chari, Aged about 65 years, married, retired, Indian National and R/o H.No.750, Portwada, Siolim, Bardez-Goa.

2.

Shri Tulshidas Sitaram Chari, S/o late Shri Sitaram Chari, Aged about 60 years, married, Carpenter by profession, Indian National and R/o H.No.58, Dandoswada, Mandrem, Pernem-Goa.

.. Petitioners Vs.

1.

Shri Kishor Shantaram Shetmandrekar, Son of Shri Shantaram Keshav Shetmandrekar, Aged about 41 years, married, Indian National, R/o H.No.134, Deulwada, Mandrem, Pernem-Goa.

2.

Mrs. Sailee Kishor Shetmandrekar, Wife of Shri Kishor Shetmandrekar, Major in age, married, Indian National, R/o H.No.134, Deulwada, Mandrem, Pernem-Goa.

3.

Village Panchayat Mandrem, Through its Secretary, Mandrem-Goa .. Respondents.

Shri Deepak Gaonkar, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Ashwin D. Bhobe, Advocate for the respondent nos.1 and 2. CORAM :- C. V. BHADANG, J.

DATE:- 1 st March, 2018

ORAL JUDGMENT :

Rule, made returnable forthwith. The learned Counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2 waives service. Heard finally by consent of parties.

2.

The challenge in this petition is to the orders dated 29/11/2017 and 08/12/2017, passed by the learned Trial Court. By Order dated 29/11/2017, the application filed by the petitioners for time to cross-examine DW2, was rejected by the Trial Court and by order dated 08/12/2017, the learned Trial Court has closed the cross-examination of expert witness DW2 on account of the failure of the learned Counsel for the petitioners/ plaintiffs to crossexamine the said witness. One of the reasons given by the learned Trial Court is that the suit is directed to be disposed of in a time bound manner.

3.

Considering the fact that the cross-examination of DW2 could not be conducted on account of the difficulty of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and further having gone through the impugned order, I find that in the interest of fair trial, one opportunity needs to be granted to the petitioners. In such circumstances, the petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 29/11/2017 and 08/12/2017 are hereby set aside. The petitioners shall be permitted to cross-examine DW2 on the next

date i.e. 17/03/2018 or any other date, to which the suit may be adjourned. The learned Counsel for the petitioners undertakes that on the next date, the witness shall be cross-examined without fail.

4.

The parties point out that the time for disposal of the suit has expired on 10/01/2018. Having regard to the fact that the suit is at an advanced stage of trial, the time for disposal of the suit is extended till 30/04/2018.

5.

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to costs.

C. V. BHADANG, J.

SMA