gst 1 wp9584.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. WRIT PETITION NO. 9584 OF 2010. Mrs.Vasudha Dayaneshwar Jawalkar.... .... ..Petitioner. V/s Mrs.Nanuben Devshi Gada & Anr. ... .... ..Respondents. Mr.H.S.Shreepad Murthy i/by Ms.P.M.Bhansali, Adv. For the petitioner. CORAM: B.R.GAVAI, J. 19th Jan., 2011. PC: By way of present writ petition the petitioner is challenging the order dated 12.10.2010 vide which the learned Small Causes Court has allowed the plaintiff to produce the new power of attorney. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since earlier powr of attorney was not found to be valid it was not permissible for the learned trial court to have permitted the second power of attorney to be produced. 3. Perusal of the para 5 itself would reveal that the learned Judge himself has observed that : “I am of the view that what will be legal effect is the question for consideration at the time of deciding admissibility of the documents, what will be the effect of filing two power of attorneys will be considered at the time of deciding of admissibility of documents.” 4. In view of the aforesaid specific observations of the learned trial Court I am not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. Hence writ petition stands dismissed.