1. C.R.P.No.1317 of 2020 is filed aggrieved by the order dated 22.06.2020 in I.A.No.62 of 2020 in O.S.No.73 of 2018 on the file of the learned
Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, whereby the application filed under Order 7 Rule 14(3) CPC to permit the petitioner therein to file
the certified copy of the sale deed dated 16.11.1992 for the purpose of marking the documents is dismissed.
2. C.R.P.No.1319 of 2020 is filed aggrieved by the order dated 22.06.2020 in I.A.No.60 of 2020 in O.S.No.73 of 2018 on the file of the learned
Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, whereby the application filed under Section 18 Rule 17 CPC to recall P.W.1 evidence for the
purpose of marking the documents is dismissed.
3. C.R.P.No.1322 of 2020 is filed aggrieved by the order dated 22.06.2020 in I.A.No.61 of 2020 in O.S.No.73 of 2018 on the file of the learned
Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, whereby the application filed under Section 151 CPC to reopen the evidence of P.W.1 in the suit
for the purpose of marking the documents is dismissed.
4. The trial Court while dismissing all the applications observed that the suit schedule property in O.S.No.73 of 2018 is not tallying with the suit
schedule property mentioned in the aforesaid document. As per the stamps appearing on certified copies of the documents, they were handed over to
the petitioner on 03.10.2019 and 31.12.2019 respectively. Further, as the petitioner filed the documents at the belated stage that too at the time of
arguments and after closure of the evidence of both the parties, the applications were dismissed.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
6. O.S.No.73 of 2018 is filed by the plaintiff against the defendant seeking declaration and perpetual injunction. The petitioner herein is the plaintiff in
the suit. He came to know about the above documents only during the course of cross-examination of D.W.1 and after his cross-examination, the
matter is posted for arguments. Thereafter, he obtained certified copies and filed the present applications immediately after he came to know about
the document, he filed them and as such, the delay cannot be attributed to the petitioner herein. As the petitioner filed the suit for declaration, it is for
him to establish his title and he should be permitted to produce best possible evidence available to him. The petitioner would mainly contend that the
four sale deeds are executed by his vendor in favour of other parties. Two sale deeds were executed on the same day when he purchased the plot on
16.11.1992 itself. He also filed reopen and recall of D.W.1 for marking the said document.
7. Learned counsel for the respondent relied upon case law reported in BOLLA AJAY BABU V/s. NALLA MANIKYAMMA 2010 (1) ALD 163
 holding to the effect that when there is no reference of the said document in the pleadings which are sought to be received, they cannot be received
at a belated stage. Learned counsel also extracted Order 7 Rule 14 CPC, which reads as under:
‘A document which ought to be produced in Court by the plaintiff when the plaint is presented, or to be entered in the list to be added or annexed to
the plaint but is not produced or entered accordingly, shall not, without the leave of the Court, be received in evidence on his behalf at the hearing of
the suit.’
8. No doubt, the aforetated documents were not referred by the plaintiff in the plaint, but it was specifically stated in the above extracted Section that
the documents shall not be received without the leave of the Court, and as such, the petitioner filed the applications to receive the documents and also
for reopen and recall of D.W.1 to mark the same. The authenticity of the documents is not disputed and the relevancy of the documents can be
considered by the trial Court at the time of hearing of the main suit. Therefore, I feel it reasonable to set aside the order of the trial Court.
9. In the result, the civil revision petitions are allowed and the impugned orders in all the revisions are accordingly set aside.
10. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in these revisions shall stand closed in the light of this final order.
