CRP 371/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr. P Upadhyay, learned Counsel for the petitioner. The instant petition has been filed to invoke the superintending jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to expunge the oral e vidence of PW 4, Sri Subodh Ghosh recorded on 20.07.2011 in TS No. 21/2007, pend ing in the Court of Civil Judge, Darrang, Mangaldai. Admittedly, there is no ord er passed by the learned Court below that has been impugned in the instant proce eding. The aforementioned suit had been instituted by the respondent No. 1 herein again st the petitioner and others as proforma respondents. The petitioner is the defe ndant No. 3 in the suit. Before the oral evidence as above, was recorded, the re spondent/plaintiff had filed the affidavit-evidence of five witnesses including that of herself. The suit was fixed on 20.07.2011 for cross-examination of the w itnesses of the respondent/plaintiff. On that day, the learned Court below recor ded the oral evidence of PW 4, Sri Subodh Ghosh to exhibit some of the documents of the respondent/plaintiff. According to the petitioner, no permission was tak en from the learned trial Court to offer said oral testimony. The same was, howe ver, recorded by the learned Court below in violation of Order 18 Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereafter for short referred to as the Code). Admittedly, the petitioner, has not taken steps before the learned Court below to efface and /or expunge the evidence of PW 4 as above, which according to him, is impermissi ble in law. In the above view of the matter, such initiative on the part of the petitioner a nd in absence of any orders passed by the learned Court below on the issue, it i s considered inexpedient to intervene at the stage. The petition is prematured a nd is dismissed.