[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL W.P.NO.7069 OF 2007 M/s.G-7 Laundry Pvt.Ltd. ..Petitioner Vs. Mrs.Irfana Hussein Shaikh ..Respondent ... Mr.Chirag Shah on behalf of Mr.J.J.Shah advocate for petitioner ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JANUARY 21, 2008 DATE : JANUARY 21, 2008 DATE : JANUARY 21, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner has challenged the order allowing the respondent’s Chamber Summons for direction to disclose the particulars and to give inspection of documents. The said order is dated 8.8.2007. The case of the defendant i.e. present respondent is that the agreement for leave and licence appears to be forged and fabricated document. Two receipts which have been relied upon by the present petitioner are also forged, fabricated and bogus. The receipts do not even bear the signature of the plaintiff therein i.e. [-2-] the present petitioner. The case of the defendant is that leave and licence agreement and receipts being forged and fabricated, same cannot be acted upon. Hence, the respondent had sought for inspection of documents and also called upon the plaintiff therein the present petitioner to furnish particulars. Apparently, inspection of documents has already been given. 3. The learned advocate for the petitioner has not come up with any reasonable or cogent answer as to why particulars sought for by the respondent, are not necessary. Looking to the affidavit in reply and the affidavit in support and the averments made therein, the learned Judge came to the conclusion that in order to remove any doubt about the validity and genuineness of the disputed documents, it is but natural for the defendant to call upon the plaintiff (present petitioner) to give better particulars in order to remove doubts. Looking to the case of the respondent, it would be necessary for the plaintiff to disclose on oath particulars as are set out in Schedule-A to the Chamber Summons and also to give inspection of documents referred to and relied upon in the plaint to the defendant [-3-] therein i.e. the present respondent. Looking to the facts of this case, no fault can be found with the order dated 8.8.2007. 4. Writ petition is rejected. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]