1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 10794 OF 2010 AND WRIT PETITION NO.: 10795 OF 2010 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.: 10794 OF 2010 AND WRIT PETITION NO.: 10795 OF 2010 *** 1. Heard Advocate Mr. Adwant for Petitioner in both the matters and Advocate Mr. Patni for Respondent in both the matters. 2. Contention of petitioner/ defendant is, after extensive cross examination of Respondent/ plaintiff the material to the prejudice of his cause has been brought on record. Only to get over that material, the documents have been sought to be produced and this is nothing but filling in lacunae. It is urged that stage of filing of documents was already long gone and in such circumstances, merely because documents were already exhibited in earlier suit between the parties, the permission to produce the same could not have been granted. 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 10794 OF 2010 AND WRIT PETITION NO.: 10795 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. 3. Advocate Mr. Patni on the other hand supports the order. According to him, documents have been exhibited in earlier suit to which the petitioner/ defendant is also party and he is aware of those documents. 4. After hearing counsel for petitioner, I find that the documents are a postal receipt, an acknowledgment and a notice under section 106 of Transfer of Property Act along with a rent note. The documents were already in existence and the petitioner/ defendant was aware of those documents. The cross examination appears to have been conducted after gathering that these documents are not on record of the civil suit. 5. The trial Court has looked into these aspects and has granted permission to produce on record the said documents. I do not find anything wrong with discretion exercised by 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 10794 OF 2010 AND WRIT PETITION NO.: 10795 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. the trial Court. There is no jurisdictional error or perversity. Petition is, therefore, rejected. No costs. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:17/01/2011. ans/10794