42 WP 4934 OF 2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 42 WRIT PETITION NO. 4934 OF 2026 SHRIDHAR ARJUN MULIK VERSUS RAMCHANDRA RAJARAM MULIK AND ORS ... Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh Rawool a/w Adv. Neeraj Lavte Advocate for Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Bharat N. Prabhu a/w Mr. Anup M. Kulkarni ... CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. DATE : 07.10.2026 PER COURT : Heard. 2. The petition is directed against the order dated 04.04.2025, passed below Exh. 80 in Regular Civil Suit NO. 22/2017. 3. The petitioner is original plaintiff, who is prosecuting Regular Civil Suit No. 22/2017 for declaration and injunction. He preferred application Exh. 80 immediately after filing affidavit in lieu of examination in chief of his first witness. The Trial Court rejected the application. 4. It is trite law that recourse to Order 26 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure can be had during the post trial and specially after the oral evidence is adduced. It would be too early to go for appointment of Commissioner. If such application is filed before recording of evidence, the Trial Court is likely to infer that the application is actuated for collection of evidence. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions of his client is ready 1/2 42 WP 4934 OF 2026.odt to file application at appropriate stage. 6. Writ petition is disposed of without causing any interference in the impugned order but granting liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to Order 26 Rule 9 of C.P.C., as is permissible in law. In case, any such application is filed, it shall be considered on its own merits without being influenced by present impugned order. ( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) mkd/- 2/2