Smt.Maria Leticia Cardozo And ANR., v. Shri. Suvarn Rajaram Bandekar, Rep. By His Duly Const. Att. Shri. R.S. Sawant And 6 ORS.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO. 454 OF 2016 SMT.MARIA LETICIA CARDOZO AND ANR., ... Petitioners

Versus

SHRI. SUVARN RAJARAM BANDEKAR, REP. BY HIS DULY CONST. ATT. SHRI.

R.S. SAWANT AND 6 ORS., ... Respondents Shri. Parag S Rao, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. P. Bhandari, Additional Government Advocate for the Respondents.

Coram:- F. M. REIS & NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ.

Date:- 25th April, 2016 P.C.:

We have heard Shri Parag Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, extensively. We have also gone through the impugned order.

2. The impugned order dated 12/02/2016 only permits the manner of proof of the subject documents in a particular manner. The veracity or otherwise, of the contents of the documents in any event is a matter to be examined in the realm of the appreciation of evidence. Though Mr. P. Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has strenuously argued that the impugned order is without jurisdiction, we find that even if such order is erroneous we cannot exercise our jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, as the Petitioner has an alternate remedy to

WP/454/2016 challenge such order.

3. Keeping all the contentions of the the parties open, we find that no case is made out for exercising our extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition, accordingly, stands rejected.

NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, J.

F. M. REIS, J.

msr