ssm sm sm IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 8992 OF 2007 PETITION NO. 8992 OF 2007 PETITION NO. 8992 OF 2007 Shri Kumar Vaman Paranjape ....Petitioner. Vs. Shri Avinash Jayaram Gore ...Respondent. Mr.S.D.Mulye for the Petitioner. Mr.S.N.Chandrachood for the Respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : : : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. DATED DATED DATED : 28th November, 2008. : 28th November, 2008. : 28th November, 2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- The Petitioner-plaintiff has challenged unreasoned order dated 23rd January, 2007 whereby, rejected his application to admit the evidence including its contents. The Court by unreasoned order rejected the same application. The Appeal and Review against such orders are not maintainable under Maharashtra Rent Control Act, being interlocutory order. 2. The Plaintiff-Petitioner is always at liberty to lead evidence to prove contents of the documents. However, it is desirable that the Court to pass reasoned order on such application, if moved. ( 2 ) Therefore, without observing anything on merits of the matter, the impugned order dated 23/01/2007 is quashed and set aside and the Court to consider his application and pass reasoned order and proceed accordingly. However, it is made clear that there is no reason to postpone the proceedings as in the present case, the plaintiff himself by filing the present Petition in the year 2007, delayed the proceedings itself. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The Appellate Court to pass reasoned order and proceed accordingly. 3. The Petition is, accordingly, allowed. . No costs. ( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)