1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4126 OF 2009 Smt.Khatoonbi Abdul Karim Aziz & others ..Petitioners. Versus Mrs.Tahima Kazi & Others ..Respondent. Mr.S.B. Prabhavalkar for the petitioners. Mr.A. Kumbhakoni i/by R.S. Shekhawat for respondent No.1. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR, J. DATE : 14TH JULY, 2009 P.C. : 1. R.A.D. Suit No.2241 of 1995 filed by the petitioner in the Court of Small Causes at Bombay was dismissed on 16-03-1998 for want of production of the documents relied upon by the plaintiff in the suit. Appeal filed against said order was dismissed by the appellate bench of the Small Causes Court on 20-01-2009. Challenging the said order, the present Petition is filed. 2. The argument of the petitioner is that the respondents had not filed their written statement in the proceedings before the trial Court and the evidence led by the petitioner had gone uncontroverted. Therefore, in view 2 of the uncontroverted evidence on record, the Courts below ought not to have dismissed the Suit. Accordingly, it is submitted that in the present case suit ought to have been decreed exparte, in the light of the evidence on record. It is submitted that in the interest of justice, the impugned orders be set aside and the suit be restored to the file. 3. There is no merit in the above contentions because, the oral evidence led by the petitioner is not supported by the material documents. The documents relied upon in the plaint have not been produced before the Trial Court. Moreover, the Petitioner could have sought liberty to produce the said documents even before the first Appellate Court. However, no such attempt has been made. Even in the present writ petition leave is not sought to tender the said documents relied upon by the plaintiff in the Suit. 4. In this view of the matter, no fault can be found with the order passed by the courts below. The writ petition is thus dismissed with no order as to costs. (J.P. Devadhar, J.)