1 wp-7000.10 Ash IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7000 OF 2010 Surendra Dejoo Shetty .. Petitioner Vs Smt. Irene George Lobo & Anr. .. Respondents -- Shri B.B. Nangre i/by B.B. Nangre & Associates for the Petitioner. Shri S.R. Singh for the Respondents. -- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 19TH OCTOBER, 2010 P.C: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. The Petitioner/Defendant in an appeal against the decree passed by the Trial Court made an application for leading additional evidence on the ground that the application made by the Petitioner at Exhibit-59 was erroneously rejected by the Trial Court. By the impugned order, the application for leading additional evidence has been rejected on the ground that the same is not covered by the scope of Rule 27 of Order XLI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 2. In my view, the Appellate Court is right in rejecting the said application. In view of Section 105 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, it will be always open for the Petitioner to challenge the order passed below 2 wp-7000.10 at Exhibit – 59 in the appeal. At the time of final hearing of the appeal, the Appellate Court can always go into the legality and validity of the order passed below Exhibit – 59. If the said order is shown to be illegal, the Appellate Court is not powerless to issue appropriate directions. 3. Subject to what is observed above, it is not necessary to interfere with the impugned order. The Petition is disposed of. (A.S.OKA, J)