Sanjay Laxmanrao Umak vs Dr. Mandakini Gorakh Megh And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 7432 Bom

     wp3834.16.J.odt                                                                                                 1/2



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                                             
                         NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR




                                                                               
                              WRIT PETITION NO.3834 OF 2016

               Sanjay Laxmanrao Umak,
               Age - 49 years,
               Occ - Business,




                                                                              
               R/o Shriram Apartment,
               Ganediwal Layout, Camp,
               Amravati, Tq. & Dist. Amravati.                                  ....... PETITIONER




                                                           
                                               ...V E R S U S...

     1]
                                  
               Dr. Mandakini Gorakh Megh,
               Age - 65 yrs. Occ - Service,
               R/o 10, Yashodhana, Opp CCI,
                                 
               Churchgate, Mumbai.

     2]        Ashish Laxmanrao Umak,
               Age - 47 years, Occ - Service,
      

               R/o 302, Shriram Apartment,
               Ganediwal Layout, Camp Amravati,
   



               Tq. & Dist. Amravati.

     3]       M/s Amalgamated Bean Coffee
              Trading Company Limited,





              a Company incorporated under the
              Companies Act, 1956, having its
              Corporate Office at No.112,
              Raheja Chambers 12,
              Museum Road, 





              Bangalore - 560 001.                               ....... RESPONDENTS
     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Shri C.A. Babrekar, Advocate for Petitioner.
              Shri P.S. Patil, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          CORAM:  R.K. DESHPANDE, J. 

th DECEMBER, 2016.

                          DATE:      19

     ORAL JUDGMENT





           wp3834.16.J.odt                                                                                                 2/2

      1]                       Rule,   made   returnable   forthwith.   Heard   finally   by




                                                                                                                  

consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties.

2] The challenge in this petition is to the order dated

29.03.2016 passed by the Trial Court below Exh.114 in Special

Civil Suit No.172 of 2008. The Court has partly rejected the

application for permission to produce the documents on record.

After hearing the learned counsels appearing for the parties it

appears that the question of relevancy of the documents can be

considered by the Court at the time of final hearing of the matter.

The application for production of the documents could not have

been therefore, rejected by the Trial Court.

3] In view of above, the petition is allowed. The order

dated 29.03.2016 passed below Exh.114 is hereby quashed and

set aside. The said application is allowed. The question of

relevancy of document is kept open to be decided by the Trial

Court at the time of final hearing. The Trial Court to decide the

matter within a period of three months from the date of first

appearance of the parties before it.

JUDGE NSN