1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4378 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.415 OF 1984 Deepak Narottamdas Shah & Ors. .. Plaintiffs Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Defendants Ms.M.S.Rane i/b. Purnanand & Co. for plaintiff Mr.Milind More, A.G.P. for State. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 28th January 2009. P.C. . This is a motion praying for permission to lead secondary evidence by plaintiffs. 2. Reliance is placed on Section 65(b) of Indian Evidence Act and it is contended that the defendants have not disputed the existence of condition and contents of the original documents in their W.S. 2 3. It is also contended that the notice of motion is duly served. Affidavit proving service has been filed. There is no affidavit in reply. Even otherwise, I am satisfied that ingredients of section 65(b) are fulfilled. Motion is, therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)