HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.5653 and 5655 OF 2009. DATED 27TH AUGUST, 2010. BETWEEN N. Prabhakara Rao and ors ….Petitioners in both CRPs and State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By District Collector, Guntur, and ors …..Respondents in both CRPs. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.5653 and 5655 OF 2009 COMMON ORDER: Heard Sri A.Rajendhra Babu, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Arbitration appearing for the respondents. Since the common questions of law arises for consideration in both the Civil Revision Petitions, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order. The petitioners herein are the plaintiﬀs before the Court below, who invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking to assail the orders dated 23.10.2009 in I.A.Nos. 795 of 2009 and 798 of 2009 respectively in O.S.No. 112 of 2002, passed by the learned III Additional District Judge, Guntur, dismissing the aforesaid interlocutory applications ﬁled by them under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC for recalling P.Ws. 1 and 8 to mark documents, and, Order 7 Rule 14 CPC for receiving the documents to mark them on plaintiﬀs side. The Court below did not ﬁnd favour on the request made by the petitioners/plaintiﬀs on the ground that there is delay and laches on their part. Having heard the learned Counsel on either side and perused the material on record, it is seen from the suit material that the said suit is ﬁled for recovery of damages and the documents sought to be ﬁled are crucial and relevant for the purpose of adjudication of the suit on merits. Since it is the case of the petitioners that they could not produce the said crucial documents and mark them in evidence due to oversight, the Court below ought to have allowed the same particularly when no prejudice could be caused to the other side even though they were allowed to be marked. Further more, marking of the documents sought to be produced would allow the Court for proper and eﬀective adjudication of the suit, without there being multiplicity of the proceedings. In view of the above, I do not ﬁnd any justification in rejecting the request of the petitioners. In the circumstances, the Civil Revision Petitions are allowed, setting aside the orders under revision dated 23.10.2009. Consequently, I.A.Nos. 795 of 2009 and 798 of 2009 in O.S.No. 112 of 2002 stand allowed. No order as to costs. ----------------------------------------- JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO 27T H AUGUST, 2010. Msnr.