1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5319 OF 2009 Sharad Mansukhlal Mutha ...Petitioner vs. Madhyam Vargiya Sarvoday Sahakari Griha Rachana Sanstha Maryadit & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.S.V.Sadavarte for the petitioner None for the respondents CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 29, 2009 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Office noting shows that the respondent nos.1 and 3 are not yet served. Considering the limited relief claimed in this petition, it is not necessary to serve the said respondents. 2 The petitioner is the second defendant in a suit filed by the first respondent. An affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief of witness was filed by the first respondent-plaintiff at Exh.39. The petitioner applied for grant of a certified copy of the said affidavit at Exh.39. By the impugned order, the said application has been rejected by the trial court on the ground that the cross examination of the witnesses is yet to commence and the petitioner can take a copy of the affidavit free of cost from the plaintiff. 3 There was no reason for the trial court to deny the request for grant of certified copy of the affidavit at Exh.39. The petitioner was ready to pay necessary copying charges. There was absolutely no reason to 2 reject the prayer made by the petitioner. Unnecessarily, the petitioner was forced to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4 Hence, I pass the following order : i) Impugned order is quashed and set aside. Application made by the petitioner at Exh.40 is allowed. The certified copy of the document at Exh.39 be supplied to the petitioner against the payment of usual charges. JUDGE