1 wp10013.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 10013 of 2010 Kamlabai Vithaldas Bajaj ...Petitioner v/s. Muttha Associates ...Respondents Mr. S.S. Patwardhan with Dipti Pawar for the petitioner. Mr. R.D. Soni i/b. Ram & co. for respondent no.1. CORAM:- B.R. GAVAI, J. DATED :- FEBRUARY 18, 2011. P.C. By way of present Petition, the Petitioner challenges the order dated 5th October, 2010 vide which the Application filed by the respondent- plaintiff for leading secondary evidence came to be allowed. 2. Shri Patwardhan, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the learned trial Court has grossly erred in allowing the application inasmuch as the conditions necessary for satisfying the provisions of Section 65 were not made out. Shri Soni, learned Counsel appearing on 2 wp10013.10.sxw behalf of Respondent opposes the Petition. 3. The learned trial Court by cogent and sound reasons has allowed the application. It has been found that documents in respect of which secondary evidence was sought to be placed on record were in the office of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has also placed on record the report of the fire brigade officer which shows that the entire building had caught fire. The learned trial Court found that plaintiff had also given notice to the defendant to admit the documents which were not admitted by the defendant. 4. In that view of the matter, no perversity could be noticed in the approach of the learned trial Court which has recorded a finding that conditions necessary for satisfying the provisions of Section 65 were made out. Rejected. (B.R. GAVAI, J)