1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1892 OF 2007 Anandraj Prabhulal Doshi & Ors. .. Petitioners. Vs. Dattu Dagadu Patange-Koli & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr.S.S.Kanetkar for the petitioners. Mr.M.A.Utagikar for respondent no1. Mr.S.R.Page for respondent no.6. Coram: D.B. BHOSALE, J. Dated : 23RD JULY, 2009 P.C. . Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioners have impugned an order dated 2.2.2007 passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Mohol, by which their application seeking liberty to lead secondary evidence in respect of sale deed dated 17th December, 1987, was rejected. Mr.Kanetkar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were allowed to produce a photo-copy of the original sale deed on record vide order dated 25.8.2006 and a certified copy of very same document was also allowed to be lead as secondary evidence and in view thereof the learned Judge ought to have allowed the petitioners to lead secondary evidence in respect of the photo-copy of the original sale deed. There is no dispute that the original sale deed is a registered document. The photo-copy placed on record at 2 Exhibit 91/3, admittedly, does not bear seal of the Registrar’s office neither there is registration number of sale deed. Moreover, the learned Judge also found that there were some insertions in the photo-copy of the sale deed and hence a findings is recorded that it creates doubt as to whether it is a photocopy of the original sale deed. Having considered the reasons recorded in the impugned order I do not find any reason to interfere in exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)