IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 605 OF 2009 M/S. CANDOLIM DEVELOPERS PVT LTD AND ANR., ... Petitioners Versus SHRI. PRAVEEN GROVER (DECEASED) THROUGH LR\'S ... Respondent Mr. J.E.Coelho Pereira, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amey Phadte,Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. A. F. Diniz, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1(a), 2 & 3. Coram:- A. P. LAVANDE, J. Date:- 16th September, 2010 P.C. Heard Mr. Coelho Pereira, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Diniz, learned Counsel for the respondents. 2. This petition has been filed by the original plaintiffs in Special Civil Suit No.122/2000 pending before Ad hoc District Judge, FTC, North Goa at Panaji challenging the order dated 13th August, 2009 by which an application dated 27th July, 2009 filed by plaintiff N.2 to lead secondary evidence in respect of the several documents mentioned in the said application, has been rejected. 3. Mr. Coelho Pereira, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners seeks leave to withdraw the application with liberty to file a fresh application after satisfying the predicates for leading secondary evidence in respect of the documents mentioned in the application. According to Mr. Coelho Pereira, the learned Judge has rejected the application, inter alia, on the ground that the predicates for leading secondary evidence in terms of section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 have not been satisfied. 4. Mr. Diniz, learned Counsel for the respondents states that he will have no objection for withdrawal of the application and granting liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh application in the event the same is permissible in law. 5. Since the application for leading secondary evidence is rejected by the learned Trial Judge primarily on the ground that the predicates for leading secondary evidence as required in terms of Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act has not been satisfied by plaintiff No.2, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioners seeking leave to withdraw the application, deserves to be granted. Accordingly, the plaintiffs are permitted to withdraw the application dated 27th July, 2009 filed by them. Consequently, the order dated 13th August, 2009 also stands quashed and set aside. 6. The plaintiffs are at liberty to file an application for leading secondary evidence in respect of the documents mentioned in the application dated 27th July, 2009 in the event it is permissible in law. The writ petition stands disposed of. A. P. LAVANDE, J. SMA