IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3981/2008 Shri.Anil Hari Joshi Petitioner Vs. Smt.Vasudha Narhar Deodhar Respondent Shri.R.M.Purandare for the petitioner CORAM : A.A.Sayed,J. Date : 3rd July,2008 P.C. 1. Two applications Exh.12 one for sending the documents below Exh.45 to hand writing expert for verifying the signature of the deceased and another application Exh.19 for direction that the specimen signature from the bank may call for verifying the signature of the deceased were made by the petitioner. Both these applications were rejected by the impugned order dt.15.2.2008 .These applications were made at the stage of appeal . In the applications nothing is stated as to why this exercise was not done at the stage of the trial. Order 41 2 Rule 27 envisage that the party shall not be entitled to produce additional evidence ,whether oral or documentary ,in the Appellate Court unless in certain cases which have been set out .One of them is that the party seeking to produce additional evidence,establishes that notwithstanding the exercise of due diligence,such evidence ,was not within his knowledge or could not,after the exercise of due diligence, be produced by him at the time when the decree appealed against was passed. 2. The Appellate Court has considered all the aspects of the mater and came to the conclusion that there is no substance in the application and the applications are rejected with cost of Rs.200/- . 3. Considering the impugned order and the material on record I find that the discretion exercised by the Appellate Court in rejecting the applications by the impugned order cannot be faulted . Writ petition is,therefore,dismissed. (A.A.Sayed,J.)