The main legal point established is the importance of expediting the trial and the power of the trial Court to refuse adjournments or impose heavy costs to ensure a complete trial.

JUDGMENT

1. Before commencing the hearing of this Court, Shri Amin, the learned Advocate mentioned that Writ Petition St No.24321/2021 is filed by defendant no.142 for the same cause of action i.e. the forfeiture of the right to cross-examination as like the adverse order having been suffered by the present petitioner who is defendant no.40 in TE & R Suit 5/6/2008.

2. The learned Advocate Mrs.Parikh representing the original plaintiff, who is appearing on behalf of the plaintiff in this Court, consents for calling for the papers in Writ Petition St No. 24321/2021. The case papers in WP St. No. 24321/2021 are called for and both these matters are heard together.

3. I have considered the strenuous submissions of Shri Jagtiani, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Shah on behalf of both the petitioners. I have considered the vehement submissions of Mrs.Parikh on behalf of the original plaintiff.

4. The issue involved in this case is as regards the 'No Cross' order passed by the learned trial Court on 11/10/2021, as against these two petitioners, who are defendant 40 and defendant 142, respectively. It is undisputed that the trial Court has also passed the order of forfeiture of the right to crossexamine as against defendant nos.39, 54, 55, 59, 60, 62, 100, 102 to 106, 108, 110, 113, 119 and 124 by order dtd. 20/9/2021. A similar order has been passed on 8/10/2021, forfeiting the right (to cross-examine) of defendant nos. 15, 37, 38, 43, 61 and 126. All these defendants, including the present two petitioners were to cross-examine PW No.1.

5. The learned Advocate for the plaintiff informs on instructions, and also since she appears on behalf of the plaintiff in the original proceedings before the trial Court that an Application has been filed by the plaintiff for re-examining PW No.1 and the said Application (Exhibit-1319) is pending hearing. Nevertheless, she submits that, if at all, this Court comes to a conclusion that defendant nos.40 and 142 be permitted to crossexamine PW 1, PW 1 would remain present in the Court at 2.15 p.m tomorrow i.e. 21/1/2022 before the trial Court.

6. Writ Petition No.4594 of 2014 was before this Court on 20/11/2019. An order dtd. 20/11/2019 was passed by this Court which reads as under :-

1. In pursuance of Order dated 24 th September 2019, the learned Judge, Small Causes Court, Mumbai has forwarded a report dtd. 16/10/2019. It is stated that, there are in all 158 defendants in the said suit and they are being represented by different Advocates. Many of the defendants are filing interim applications in the matter and therefore, it is very difficult to conclude the hearing of the said suit.

2. It is to be noted here that, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal No. 33118 of 2018 has categorically directed that the Trial Court to strictly observe the time which has been granted by the High Court in concluding the hearing of the said suit.

3. It appears from the record that, the defendants herein are intending to frustrate the Order passed by this Court and also the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

4. Mr. Bijliwala, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 42, 43, 50, 55, 73, 96 and 105 submitted that, in view of the large number of defendants, it is not possible to conclude the hearing of the said suit within the time frame as described by this Court and affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He further submitted that, the parties herein are entitled to file applications under the law and therefore the hearing of the said suit can not be concluded within time frame. The said submissions are recorded only for its rejection, as the Supreme Court has categorically directed the Trial Court to comply with the directions issued by this Court. The said directions issued are to be adhered to and followed in its true sense without giving any excuses by the learned Advocates for the respondents.

5. Be that as it may, by consent of parties, the period to conclude the hearing of the