SURAJ TULSHIDAS NAIK Vs. CHANDAR BARKELO FADTE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Learned Counsel for the Respondents waives service. Heard finally by consent of the parties.

(2.) Heard Shri Desai, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Shri Coutinho, learned Counsel for the Respondent nos. 1 to 5, who are the original Plaintiffs and the only contesting Respondents. The service of notice to Respondents no. 6 and 7, who are original defendants no. 2 and 3 is dispensed with.

(3.) The Petitioner, who is the original Defendant no. 1, filed an application for production of additional documents being Application Exhibit 104-D. Thereby, the Petitioner sought to produce a CD of photographs which were clicked on 03.10.2007 by a professional photographer namely Eknath Uttam Khedekar and a certificate dated 09.03.2015 issued by Rucha Photo Studio. The Trial Court found that the Petitioner had filed a list of documents on 25.02.2009 and as the CD was generated on 30.06.2008, which was prior to the filing of the list of documents, the Petitioner had "ample opportunity to enlist the said CD in the list of documents". The learned Trial Court has also found that, prima facie, the CD was secondary device used for storage and the memory card of the digital camera which was used for taking the photographs would be the primary evidence. The Trial Court has also observed that the certificate dated 09.03.2015 of the photographer does not clarify whether it was on the same day that the CD was generated using the memory card.