JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Heard Mr Rohit Bras De Sa for the petitioners and Mr Thali for respondent no.1 (contesting respondent).

2. Mr De Sa states that the above position was made clear on 19/8/2019 and based upon the same this Court issued notice only to respondent no.1. Accordingly, leave is now granted to delete the other respondents. Mr De Sa states that amendment will be carried out forthwith.

3. Rule. The rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

4. The challenge in this petition is to the order dtd. 25/6/2019, dismissing petitioners' application seeking leave to lead secondary evidence.

5. The Trial Court perhaps did not have the benefit of the decision of this Court in Parasanbai Dhanraj Jain and Ors. V/s. Sunanda Madhukar Jain and Ors. (2018 (1) Mh.L.J.). Paragraph 11 of this decision reads as follows:

"11. I have recently set out the law on this and I will say so briefly once again: either secondary evidence is led or it is not led. Either the provisions of Sec. 65 are met or they are not met. No permission of a Court is required to lead evidence of any kind. No judge in the subordinate judiciary to this High Court will hereafter will