1. - By the impugned order, the application of the petitioner filed under Order 13 Rule 10 had already been allowed and the original of the documents, certified copies whereof are on record have already been requisitioned.

2. By the impugned order, the application of the petitioner for dispensing with the formal proof of the document has been dismissed and thereby the request for drawing presumption under Section 90 of the Evidence Act has been declined. Suffice it to say that at the time of passing of the order, the original documents were not before the court with respect to which the court could exercise its discretion as to whether a presumption under Section 90 is attracted or not, or is required to be drawn or not.

3. The learned counsel for the non-petitioners submits that discretion lies with in trial court to draw any presumption with respect to the documents or not, inasmuch as the provision of Section 90 are only the rules of Evidence, and at the time of final hearing, the court is to apply its mind as to whether the presumption under Section 90 is to be invoked or not with respect to particular document.

4. In my view, the learned counsel for the non-petitioners i