JUDGMENT :

1. Rule. Rule, made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, petition is taken up for final disposal.

2. The procedural impropriety highlighted in the present petition is to permit the Plaintiffs to conduct re-examination of P.W.1 by filing Affidavit in-lieu of re-examination instead of conducting reexamination by examining the said witness in the Court. There is no dispute to the position that by virtue of judgment and order dated 12 January 2024 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 1534 of 2022, Plaintiffs have been permitted to re-examine P.W.1. It appears that before passing of the judgment and order dated 12 January 2024, in anticipation of grant of re-examination of P.W.1, Affidavit in-lieu of reexamination of P.W.1-Satish Dhirajlal Vithalani was already filed in the Court. The only issue that needs consideration in the present petition is whether re-examination of a witness can be conducted by permitting such witness to file Affidavit in-lieu of re-examination. Order 18 Rule 4 of the Code deals with recording of evidence and provides thus :

O18. R.4 (1)In every case, the examination-in-chief of a witness shall be on affidavit and copies thereof sha