SUBHASH SHRIRANG SALUNKE AND OTHERS v. MOHAN MUKINDA GUNDIBONE KOLI AND OTHERS
WP/8587/2024 · 2025-07-02
Shri Rohit W Joshi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 61361 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 61361 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
966 WP NO.8587.2024 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8587 OF 2024 SUBHASH SHRIRANG SALUNKE AND OTHERS VERSUS MOHAN MUKINDA GUNDIBONE KOLI AND OTHERS ... Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. A. G. Choudhari Advocate for Respondents No. 1 to 3 and 8 : Mr. B. R. Sontakke Advocate for Respondent No. 7 : Mr. S. M. Jadhao ...
CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. Dated : July 2, 2025 PER COURT :-
1. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the petition on instructions from the petitioners and more particularly on written instructions / letter received from the petitioner No. 2 Waman Shrirang Salunke. The instructions / letter received from the petitioner No. 2 is taken on record and marked as ‘X’ for identification.
2. The present petition was filed challenging the order dated 12.04.2024 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Osmanabad in Civil M. A. No. 219 of 2023, rejecting the said application which was filed for transfer of a civil suit under Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure. The ground for transfer was that the
966 WP NO.8587.2024 -2- learned Trial Court disallowed the Advocate for the plaintiffs from posing certain questions to a witness during the course of the cross- examination of the witness. Since the questions which were disallowed were also not recorded, the plaintiffs’ Advocate was
directed to file an affidavit. In order to give opportunity to the defendant to counter the contentions in the affidavit filed by the plaintiffs’ Advocate, permission was granted by this Court to add defendant’s Advocate as party-respondent in the present petition. There are no allegations against the learned Advocate who was ordered to be arrayed as a party-respondent.
3. In that view of the matter, since the petition is withdrawn, the name of respondent No. 8 is directed to be deleted from the array of respondents. Amendment of deletion be carried out forthwith.
(ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.) Omkar Joshi