HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. (2271 N0, 2646 OF 2011 PETITIONBR P'aintiff RESPOiSEDBNTS Defendants VBIRSUS 1. 6. 7. Bharat Aluminium Company Limited, a Coinpaay incorporated under the Provisions of fhe Conipanies Act, 1956 aad having its registered office at Aluininium. Sadan, Core-6, Scope OfBce Complex-7, Lodi Road, New Delhi 110 003 and also canying on business froin P.0. BALCO nagar, Korba, 495 684 (C.G.). Anish Metals Pvt. Ltd. A Company iacorporated uiider the Provisions of the Coinpanies Act, 1956 and having its registered ofiBce and cariying on busiaess froin 60, Kao.sara, Chawl, Kalbadevi Road, Mi , Mumbai -400 002. Paakaj Aluminiuin Industries Ltd. A Comipaay incorporated iinder fhe Provisions of the Coinpamcs Act, 1956 aad haviug its registered officc aud canymg on. busiaess froiu 106 CRK Wadi, Ist Floor, 114, V.P. Road Mumbai 400 084. Paakaj Extrusion Ltd. A CoDipany iacorporated under the provisions of fhe Conipanies Act, 1956 and haviag its registered office and canyuig on business from 15/1/4, Rakholi village Silvassa, UT ofD & NH. Paakaj Metals Pvt. Ltd. A Company incorporated under fhe provisions of the Coiupauies Act, 1956 and having its register office and canying on busiaess frosi 55-C, 1st Khattarali Laae, Thakurdwar Road, Muinbai 400002. Hiren AlumiTiiuia Ltd, a coinpany incQrporated under the provisions of fhe conipaaies Act, 1956 and haviag its registered office aad canyiag on busiaess froni 126/1 RaKhoU viUage near RakhoU School, RakhoU, UT of D &NH. State Baak of India, a baaking Coinpany constituted uiider the State Baak of India Act, 1955, having its Head 0£&ceat Corporate Centre, State Baak Bhavan, Madame Cama Road, Muinbai -400 021 and canying on busiaess froin Balco Township Balco Nagar, District Korba (C.G.) 495 684. Banlc of India, a banldng Coiupany constituted uiider fhe Baukiag Coinpanies (Acqiusition and Transfer U Sl-.-S-TK. S S, ! BK. ^- 'l&g) ofundertakm.gs) Act, 1970, haviag its Head OfEce at Express Towers, Nanman Poiut, Miunbai 400 02 1 and also canyiag on business froin kalbadevi Braach, Round Building, Shymaldas Gaadhi Marg, Muiabai 400 002. 8. ARCIL Shripati Arcade Angmt Kraati Marg, Mana Chowk, Mumbai 400036. WRIT PETITION UNDBR ARTICLE 227 OF THB CON8TITUTION OF IBDIA. (8B :Hon'ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:- Mr. Sanjay K, Agrawal, Advocate with Mr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Prashant Oupta, Advoeate on behalf of Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate for the respondent No. 2, 4 8s 5. Mr. Malay Kumar Bhaduri, Advccate for the respondent No. 6. Mr. Ramakant Pandey, Advocate for the respondent No. 7. None for the respondents No. 1, 3 Ss 8. ORAL- ORDBR (Passedou 25/07/2011) I. By fhis petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India petitioner has chaUenged fhe legaUty aad propriety ofthe order dated 27/4/2011 passed by Distnct Judge, Korba (C.G.) ia civU suit No. l-A/2006 whereby District Judge, Korba (C.G.) has dismissed fhe appUcation ffled under Order 11 Riile 12 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 for discoveiy of docuiaents alleged to be in. possession ofrespondents. 2. Mr. Saajay K. Agrawal, Advocate witb Mr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate for fhe petitioner, Mr. Prashaut Gupta, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Waakhede, Advocate for the respondent No. 2, 4 & 5, Mr. Malay Kumar Bhadtui, Advocate for tiie respondent No. 6 aud Mr. Ramakant Paadey, Advocate for the respondent No. 7. are heard. 3... Order inipugned, copy of alleged appUcation for discovery of such documents and copy ofreply ffled on behalfofrespondeiits perused. 4. Application filed on behalf of petitioner aud the docunients mentioned ia such application clearly reveal that except document No. 8 i.e. account stateuients regarding auiounts paid by defeadants No. 2, 4, 5 •^' 5. to plaintiff regarding purchase of alumiTium products and discounts availed for March 2004-April 2005, other documents are available wifh F'ublic Authorities irom which present petitioner can obtain. certified copy or ui case of necessity to caU sumiaon such Authority along with documents. After consideriag the nature of documents and stagc of filmg fhe application, Court below has dismissed the application, I do not fiiid aay iUegalily ia fhe order inipugned requiring auy iaterference in. exercise of writ jurisdiction. Consequenfly, petition is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. AU uiterim appUcations are also disuussed. No order as to costs. c^i. T-P.Sharma judge