1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 573 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 573 OF 2011 *** 1. Heard Advocate Shri Kedar for Petitioner/ defendant. Respondent/ plaintiff wanted to lead secondary evidence in relation to a memorandum of partition. He produced photo copy of that along with his plaint and thereafter sought permission vide Exhibit-20 mentioning that original thereof is with defendant No.1 (present petitioner). The defendant No.1/ petitioner vide his reply to that application denied fact of any such partition. 2. Contention before this Court is, photostat copy cannot be permitted to be proved by leading secondary evidence unless it is compared with original and second contention is that the procedure of issuing notice to produce original ought to have been complied with. It is apparent that petitioner/ defendant No.1 is not accepting 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 573 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. the fact of alleged oral partition, there is no question of any notice being issued to him only for the sake of formality. The trial Court has correctly appreciated the position and permission to lead secondary evidence has been given. The defence that there never was any such partition is still open and petitioner can conduct proper cross examination to prove it. There is no jurisdictional error or perversity. Petition is rejected. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:25/01/2011. ans/573