1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3341/2011 (SUDHAKAR NAMDEORAO ZADE & ANOTHER VERSUS THE SAINAGAR COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY & ANOTHER) WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3342/2011 (SAU. REKHA SUDHAKAR ZADE VERSUS THE SAINAGAR COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY & ANOTHER) WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3343/2011 (BABAN NAMDEORAO ZADE VERSUS THE SAINAGAR COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY & ANOTHER) WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3344/2011 (SOU.RATNAPRABHA BABAN ZADE VERSUS THE SAINAGAR COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY & ANOTHER) WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3345/2011 (SUDHAKAR NAMDEORAO ZADE VERSUS THE SAINAGAR COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY & ANOTHER) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri N.A. Jachak, counsel for the petitioners in all the petitions. Shri S.L. Kotwal, counsel for the R-1 in all the petitions . CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : AUGUST 16, 2011 . By these petitions, the petitioner impugns the order passed by the 5th Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nagpur on 06.07.2011 allowing an application filed by the respondent no.1. 2 An application was filed by the respondent no.1- plaintiff for grant of permission to refer to the original documents filed in Regular Civil Suit No.974/2005. It was the case of the respondent no.1-plaintiff that the matter was fixed for cross-examination of the plaintiff on 18.07.2011 and the original documents were filed in Regular Civil Suit No.974/2005 and, therefore, they were required to be referred to, before exhibiting the documents in this suit. Though the application was strongly opposed by the petitioner-defendant, the trial Court, by the impugned order dated 06.07.2011, allowed the application. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the trial Court did not commit any error in granting permission to the plaintiff to refer to the original documents filed in Regular Civil Suit No.974/2005 as the plaintiff could not have produced the original documents in the present civil suit as they were filed in Regular Civil Suit No.974/2005. The trial Court rightly observed that no prejudice would be caused to the defendants in case the record in Regular Civil Suit No.974/2005 was called. The only apprehension expressed on behalf of the petitioners that some of the documents filed in Regular Civil Suit No.974/2005 are not the original documents and the 3 respondent no.1-plaintiff would unnecessarily rely on those documents to get the documents in the present suit exhibited, is not well founded as the trial Court would take care of this aspect of the matter while deciding whether the documents in this case should be exhibited or not. In the result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE APTE