IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 903 WRIT PETITION NO. 9601 OF 2017 Sarjan Realities Ltd Through Its Authorised Representative M S Borse VERSUS Asha Baban @ Babloo Rakshe And Others ... Advocate for the Petitioner : Senior Counsel Mr. Katneshwarkar P. R. Advocate for Respondents : Mr. Solanke Shrikrashna B. ... CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. Dated : August 19, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. The present petition takes exception to the order dated 22/11/2016 passed by learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Parner, Taluka Parner, District Ahmednagar, rejecting application at Exhibit 43 in Regular Civil Suit No.399 of 2014. 2. The said application was filed by present petitioner/original defendant seeking permission to lead secondary evidence in respect of certain documents. Learned Trial Court rejected the application on the ground that necessary ingredients, as contemplated under Section 65 of Indian Evidence Act, for making secondary evidence admissible in evidence were absent. 3. It is now well settled that, in order to make secondary evidence admissible in evidence, foundation facts are required to be proved by Page 1 of 3 2026:BHC-AUG:37312 903 WP 9601-2017 party intending to lead such secondary evidence. This can be done by introducing necessary foundational facts during course of evidence. Other side is also entitled to cross-examine party intending to lead secondary evidence or witnesses examined on behalf of such party, in respect of such foundational facts. 4. In that view of the matter, issue regarding admissibility of secondary evidence cannot be decided at threshold without affording an opportunity to party seeking to lead such evidence to establish necessary foundation facts. Question as to whether such secondary evidence can ultimately be admitted in evidence would have to be considered by learned Trial Court after opportunity to establish foundational facts on record is given and after giving due opportunity to other side to contest its admissibility. 5. In view of aforesaid, petition is partly allowed. 6. Present petitioner /original defendant in civil suit, is permitted to introduce necessary foundational facts during course of its evidence. The learned Trial Court shall consider whether permission to lead secondary evidence can be granted in accordance with law, Page 2 of 3 903 WP 9601-2017 upon appreciation of evidence relating to foundational facts. 7. Impugned order dated 22/11/2016 shall not come in way of present petitioner in establishing necessary foundational facts. Issue regarding admissibility of secondary evidence will be decided by learned Trial Court independently. ( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. ) vj gawade/-. Page 3 of 3