Neeta Sawant 19-WP-6540-2026.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6540 OF 2026 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (ST.) NO. 18467 OF 2026 Walkeshwar Triveni CHS Ltd. ..Petitioner … : Versus : Himanshu Doshi & Ors. .Respondents … Mr. Ghanshyam Mishra with Ms. Ekta Bhalerao & Mr. Sujeet Chaudhary, for the Petitioner. Ms. Usha Tiwari with Ms. Vandana Tiwari, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED : 29 AUGUST 2026. P.C : 1) Perusal of the application filed by Respondent No.1 at Exhibit-43 would clearly indicate that what is instituted by Respondent No.1 is a roving enquiry. The learned Judge of the Co-operative Court has not even bothered to go through the unending list of documents that Respondent No.1 called upon the Society to produce. Without applying its mind to the documents sought to be produced, the Co-operative Court has mechanically directed production of each and every document demanded. The approach of the Co-operative Court is not appreciated. The Petitioner-Society is yet to file its evidence and will produce documents which are necessary for proving its claim. In the event, relevant documents are not produced, the disputant-society will fail in the dispute. However, Respondent No.1 cannot be permitted to conduct a fishing enquiry by calling upon the Society to produce virtually each and every document that it possess in its office. To illustrate, Respondent no.1 sought copy of Lease _____________________________________________________________________________ PAGE NOS. 1 of 2 Saturday, 29 August 2026 Neeta Sawant 19-WP-6540-2026.docx Agreement in respect of the land on which society s buildings are standing. ' It is difficult to comprehend as to how this document is necessary for determining whether the society is entitled to recover the claim amount from Respondent No.1. Unfortunately, the learned Judge of the Co- operative Court has not even bothered to go through the list of documents, of which Respondent No1. demanded production. 2) Consequently, the order dated 15 December 2025 and order dated 21 April 2026 passed by the Co-operative Court are set aside. Setting aside the impugned orders would not preclude Respondents No.1 and 2 from filing fresh application for production of documents by demonstrating the relevance of each document to the issue involved in the dispute. In the event, Respondent Nos.1 and 2 file an application seeking production of documents not having connection with the issue involved in the dispute, the Co-operative Court shall reject such application by imposing exemplary costs on Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. 3) With disposal of the Writ Petition, the Interim Application does not survive. The same also stands disposed of. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] _____________________________________________________________________________ PAGE NOS. 2 of 2 Saturday, 29 August 2026 NEETA SHAILESH SAWANT Digitally signed by NEETA SHAILESH SAWANT Date: 2026.08.31 14:54:56 +0530