( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8282 OF 2009 Ashabai w/o Vitthal Patil, R/o Akulkheda, Tq. Chopada, District Jalgaon. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. Lakhichand s/o Nago Shinde 2. Latabai d/o Vitthal Patil 3. Devkabai w/o Gokul Patil 4. Shri Vitthal Nago Shinde 5. Sumanbai w/o Narayan Dhivare All r/o Akulkheda, Taluka Chopada, Dist. Jalgaon. 6. Sau. Sakhubai Idhan Kapadane, R/o Anore, Tq. Dharangaon, District Jalgaon. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. A.S. Shelke, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.B. Patil, advocate for respondents No. 1, 4, 5 and 6. ..... [CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J.] [DATE : 26th March, 2010] ORAL JUDGEMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and with consent of learned counsel for the parties, heard ( 2 ) finally. 2. The order passed by the trial Court below Exh-115 (in R.C.S. No. 59/2003) demonstrates utter ignorance of law on the part of the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Chopda. The claim of the plaintiff is founded on the sale-deed alleged to have been executed by one of the defendants in favour of other defendants. The plaintiff himself is seeking declaration in respect of the binding nature of the sale-deed. The original document produced by the defendants, in such situation, does not need any formal proof and the same is required to be admitted in evidence. If the plaintiff contradicts or denies the execution of the document, probably, he will not be entitled to relief of declaration as claimed by him. Thus, there does not seem to be any opposition from the plaintiff for exhibiting the document. In the plaint itself, the plaintiff has admitted the execution of the document; however, he has merely claimed declaration in respect of binding nature of the sale- deed so far as plaintiff is concerned. ( 3 ) 3. As the document – sale-deed itself is admitted by the plaintiff, there is no need to call upon the defendants to prove the sale-deed. It ought to have been exhibited by the trial Court. Hence, the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chopda below application (Exh-115) is quashed and set aside. The trial Court is directed to exhibit the document – sale-deed. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs. [ R.M. BORDE ] JUDGE NPJ/wp8282-09