IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.10301 of 2011 ==================================================== ASHOK KUMAR @ ASHOK MANDAL - Petitioner/s(s) Versus SMT.SHAKUNTALA DEVI & ORS - Respondent/s(s) ==================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s: Mr. RAM SEVAK CHOUDHARY For the Respondent/s: Mr. ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO DATE: 04-07-2011 ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO) 2. 04.07.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This writ application has been filed against the order dated 20.4.2011 passed by Sri Atul Kumar, Munsif 1st, Munger in Title Suit No. 29 of 2009 whereby, the learned court below has allowed three applications filed by the plaintiff-respondent for marking certain documents as exhibits in the case. From perusal of the order it appears that some map was filed by the plaintiff and it was prayed that the same may be marked as exhibit. Another application was filed stating that the written statement 2 filed by the petitioner in the court of Executive Magistrate, Jamalpur in Reference Case No.623-M of 2008 has been marked as Ext.3 but inadvertently this certified copy of letter No. 680 dated 28.8.2007 has been marked as exhibit instead of written statement therefore, it was prayed that instead of marking the letter the written statement be marked as exhibit. It was also prayed for calling for the register from the Anchal Adhikari, Jamalpur for marking exhibit in the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the documents are forged and fabricated documents which have been filed at the fag end of hearing of the suit with a view to delay the disposal of the suit and also at belated stage. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned court below has only marked the documents as exhibits. By Marking document as exhibit no rights of the parties have been decided. Therefore, the petitioner is at liberty to raise all these questions about the reliability of 3 these documentary evidences which have been marked as exhibits at the time of hearing of the suit. Since the documents have only been marked as exhibit, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. S.S. (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)