: 1 : cwp-2502-11=.sxw USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2502 OF 2011 Nisha Allahabadia .. Petitioner v/s. Vivek Allahabadia .. Respondent ......... Ms. T.F. Irani for the petitioner None for the respondent ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 25th MARCH, 2011 P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. The respondent has filed Petition No. A-102 of 1999 in the Family Court at Bombay. After the stage of recording of evidence was over, the petitioner who is respondent before the learned Judge of the Family Court filed an application at Exh.137 calling upon the respondent herein to produce large number of documents. It is seen that this application was filed after the stage of recording of evidence was over and at the stage when the Court was hearing the arguments. 2. The learned Judge has considered the matter in the proper perspective and has arrived at a conclusion that where ever the : 2 : cwp-2502-11=.sxw respondent has failed to comply with requisitions as regards production of documents or where the respondent has produced some documents and has not produced some documents, appropriate inference can be drawn. In my view, the practice of calling upon the adversary to produce documents after the stage of recording of evidence is over, cannot be accepted. It is not the case of the petitioner that she did not get a chance to call upon the respondent to do many things during the course of cross-examination. It appears that on account of change of advocate, the stances have been changed by the petitioner. In my view, no interference is required in the impugned. The petition is required to be rejected. Hence, following order is passed. ORDER (i) Petition is rejected at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)