jpc wp1658-11.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1658 OF 2011 Ramesh Jagannath Chandak and others ... Petitioners Versus Amolakchand Dhokalchand Chandak (deceased -through legal heirs) ... Respondents and others Mr. Sandeep Dilip Shinde for the petitioner Mr. Niranjan Mogre i/by Mr. S. M. Gorwadkar for Respondent No.2 CORAM: R. M. SAVANT, J. DATED : 16th November, 2011 P.C. : 1. The above Petition takes exception to the order dated 1st September, 2010 passed by the learned District Judge-3, Nashik by which order application Exh. 33 for producing additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure came to be allowed. 2. The said application Exh.33 has been filed by the appellant in Regular Civil Appeal No. 52 of 2007 which has been filed for challenging the decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 27 of 2002. It is the case of the applicants- respondents herein, that the said documents were not jpc wp1658-11.sxw 2 within the knowledge and that only after the application under the Right to Information Act was filed, the said documents were made available and therefore the same could not be produced in the trial. The First Appellate Court has considered the reasons given by the applicants in the said application Exh.33 for non production of the documents at the trial stage and considering the fact that all the documents are public documents and would aid in resolving the controversy between the parties, has allowed the said Application Exh.33. In my view, the discretion exercised by the First Appellate Court in permitting the applicants i.e. the respondents herein to lead additional evidence by way of public documents cannot be faulted with. No case for interference is made out. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (R. M. SAVANT, J.)