Dr. Akshay S/O Navalkishor ... vs Dr. Arti W/O. Akshay Lakhotiya
2016 Latest Caselaw 4576 Bom

     WP3707.16.odt                                                                                                                 1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR




                                                                                                                     
                              WRIT PETITION NO. 3707 OF 2016




                                                                                    
                Dr. Akshay Navalkishor Lakhotiya
                aged 32 yrs., Occp. Doctor,




                                                                                   
                r/o "Navkiran", 41, Toshniwal Layout,
                Near National Highway No.6, Akola,
                Tah. & Distt. Akola.        ::                  PETITIONER




                                                               
                         .. Versus
                                   ..
                                    
                Dr. Arti w/o Akshay Lakhotiya
                aged about 31 yrs., Occ. Doctor,
                r/o c/o Subhash Heda, Advocate,
                                   
                "Navrang Park", Apartment, 
                Near Navramg Spcoety, 
                New Radhakisan Plot, Akola,
                Tah. & Distt. Akola.        ::                                                   RESPONDENT
      


     ...................................................................................................................................
                                   Shri V. S. Kukday, Advocate for the petitioner.
   



                                  Shri M. G. Sarda, Advocate for the respondent.
     ...................................................................................................................................

                                                                   CORAM :  S. B. SHUKRE, J.

DATED : 09 AUGUST, 2016.

O R A L J U D G M E N T O R A L J U D G M E N T

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent.

3. The order rejecting the application filed for production of

documents is impugned in this petition. It is well settled law that

when such an application is filed under the provisions of Order XI Rule

14 of the Civil Procedure Code, the discretion must be exercised by the

Court liberally, unless it is shown that prejudice would be caused to

the other side. Such is not the case here. The aspect of causing of

prejudice or otherwise to either of the parties has not been considered

by the learned Judge while passing the impugned order.

4. In the circumstances, impugned order cannot be sustained

in the eye of law and it deserves to be quashed and set aside.

Writ petition is allowed.

The impugned order is quashed and set aside.

The application vide Exh.245 is allowed and the

documents are permitted to be produced on record.

Rule is made absolute accordingly.

JUDGE

wwl

CERTIFICATE

"I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct

copy of original signed Judgment."

Uploaded by : W.W. Lichade, P.A.

Uploaded on : 11/8/2016