SRJ 1 wp-1874-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1874 OF 2010 Ramesh G. Parab .. Petitioner V/s. Municipal Corporation for Greater Bombay. .. Respondent. Mr. R.S.Khatib, for Petitioner. Mr. M.M.Malwankar, for Respondent. CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE :7th APRIL,2010 P.C.:- 1] Heard Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent. An application made by the Petitioner for leading secondary evidence of certain documents has been rejected by the Trial Court by the impugned order. 2] The Application was made for seeking permission to lead the secondary evidence of the following documents:- (i) City Survey Extract of 1949; (ii) Certain letters allegedly written by the Respondent Corporation; (iii) Electricity Bills for the period 1-7-1999 to 31-8-1999; SRJ 2 wp-1874-10.sxw (iv) Notice issued by the Respondents under Section 314 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888. 3] The Petitioner can always apply for a certified copy of the City Survey Extract of 1949. The Petitioner can call upon the Respondent Corporation to produce the letters referred in item no.(ii) and the office copy of the notice in item no.(iv). Witness Summons can be issued to the concerned authorities for producing office copies of electricity bills referred to in item no.(iii). If the Petitioner is not provided certified copy of City Survey Extract of 1949 and if the Respondent Corporation does not produce the office copies of the documents at item nos. (ii) and (iv), the Petitioner can always make a fresh application to the Trial Court for leading secondary evidence of the said documents. Even if the concerned authority fails to produce the office copies of the electricity bills referred in item no.(iii), the remedy of the Petitioner is always open. 4] Hence, at this stage, no interference is called for with the impugned order and Petition is disposed of by passing following order:- (i) The Trial Court will grant reasonable time to the Petitioner to take steps as observed in the judgment; (ii) As observed above, it will be always open to the Petitioner to file a fresh application for grant of permission to lead secondary evidence. SRJ 3 wp-1874-10.sxw (iii) If such fresh application is filed, the same will be decided on its merits without influenced by the impugned order. (iv) Subject to what is stated above, Writ Petition is rejected. (v) The parties and Trial Court to act on an authenticated copy of this order. (A.S.OKA,J.)