IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 153 OF 2011 MR. WILLIAM FERNANDES AND 4 ORS., ... Petitioners Versus MR. FRANCIS SIMON CABRAL SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LRS. ... Respondent Mr. Sudesh Usgaonkar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ashwin Bhobe, Advocate for the respondents. Coram:- A. P. LAVANDE, J. Date:- 15th April, 2011 P.C. Heard Mr. Usgaonkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhobe, learned Counsel for the respondents. 2. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners take exception to the order dated 28th February, 2011 passed by the trial Court by which the application dated 7th February, 2011 filed by the plaintiffs has been allowed. 3. By the said application, the plaintiffs have sought leave to take inspection and enlargement of photograph of original at exhibit 52/2 colly (disputed writings) and exhibits 52/3 to 52/13 (specimen writings) through the handwriting expert Shri M M. Kakkar and produce evidence on the same. 4. According to Mr. Usgaonkar, the respondents are not entitled to lead fresh evidence in view of the order dated 15th October, 2010 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.642/2010. 5. According to Mr. Bhobe, learned Counsel for the respondents, in terms of the order dated 15th October, 2010, the plaintiffs are entitled to lead evidence in respect of the admitted and disputed writings as sought to be done in terms of the application dated 7th February, 2011. Mr. Bhobe, learned Counsel for the respondents states that the respondents would not examine the expert Mr. M. M. Kakkar in respect of earlier report since the earlier report is based on xerox copies of exhibit 52/2 colly. 6. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the record and the earlier order dated 15th October, 2010 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.642/2010, I am of the considered opinion that no interference is warranted with the impugned order in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. By the impugned order, the trial Court has allowed the plaintiff's prayer to permit their expert to take inspection and photographs of the disputed and admitted writings. By the impugned order, the respondents have been permitted to lead evidence in support of their stand. 7. It is also pertinent to note that by the judgment and order dated 15th October, 2010, the petitioners herein were permitted to lead evidence of Government handwriting expert to prove the signature of one Mr. Anil Das. In my opinion, the impugned order does not disclose any jurisdictional error. In my opinion, this is not a fit case in which this Court should interfere in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, which has to be exercised sparingly and to ensure that the Courts and Tribunals function within the bounds of their authority. Moreover, Mr. Bhobe has submitted that the plaintiffs would not examine Mr. Kakkar- handwriting expert in respect of the earlier report. The said statement is accepted. 8. In view of the above, Writ Petition stands dismissed. 9. The interim relief granted on 14th March, 2011 shall stand vacated. Parties to appear before the trial Court on 5th May, 2011 at 10.00 a.m. A. P. LAVANDE, J. SMA