1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5352 OF 2009 Sow.Smita Abhay Mistry, age: 39 years, Occ: Agriculture & Business, R/o Vedant, Adarsha Colony, Savedi, District Ahmednagar. Petitioner Versus Shaikil Ibrahim Shaikh, age: 49 years, Occ: Contractor, R/o Zendigate, Ahmednagar. Respondent Mr.A.M.Gholap, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.N.C.Garud, advocate for Respondent. CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 17th November, 2009. P.C.: 1 Petitioner is raising exception to the interlocutory order passed by 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar, on 21.03.2009, below Exhibit-127 in Regular Civil Suit No.148/2003. 2 While considering the application tendered by the defendant, learned trial Judge directed to put exhibits to documents which were produced on record by the defendant. The plaintiff has objected to the same on the ground that those documents are not proved in accordance with provisions of Evidence Act. It is contended that the documents were not referred to the witness who was examined on behalf of the defendant and as such exhibition of the documents is not proper. 2 3 It is to be noted that merely because the documents have given exhibits, it does not lead to an inference that the same are proved in accordance with the provisions of Evidence Act. Learned trial Judge, while deciding the suit, shall take into account the objections that would be raised by the plaintiff in reference to the documents placed on record by the defendant and shall examine, whether those documents are proved in accordance with the provisions of Evidence Act. The trial Judge is expected to weigh the evidence produced by the parties and reach appropriate conclusion while rendering decision in the matter. 4 At this interlocutory stage, no interference is called for in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5 Writ Petition, therefore, stands rejected. Interim relief stands vacated. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* adb/wp535209