Bombay High Court

WP/4934/2026 of Shridhar Arjun Mulik Vs Ramchandra Rajaram Mulik AND ORS on 7 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

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

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

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

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/-

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead