CRP 390/2008 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE HN SARMA Heard Mr D Mazumdar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr P Sunni, learned counsel for the respondent. Challenge made in this petition is the order dated 25.9.2008 passed by t he learned Munsiff, Kaliabor, in Title Suit No 12(K)/2006, rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to file two sale deeds in the suit holding that no sufficient ground was shown for acceptance of the said documents. Although the aforesaid tw o documents were initially allowed to be taken back, those were not filed again as required under Order 8, Rule 1A, CPC. The petitioners filed an application se eking leave to file those documents. Vide order dated 3.5.2008, those documents were expunged by the learned Court below. The aforesaid order was challenged by the petitioners before this Court in CRP No 198/2008 and vide order dated 2.7.20 08, this Court directed the Court below to reconsider the matter with regard to the leave petition. On 25.9.2008, the learned Munsiff rejected the prayer of the petitioners to accept the documents. In the meantime, substantial progress in t he suit has been made. After completion of the pleadings of the parties, the pla intiff’s witnesses were cross-examined in the early part of the year 2007 by the petitioners. The petitioner filed this application for accepting the documents sometime on 5.4.2008, ie, much after the examination of the plaintiff’s witnesse s was over. If at this stage the documents are accepted the petitioners would no t be able to counter the same as examination of the Plaintiff’s witnesses is alr eady over. It is seen from the copy of the written statements at paragraph- 18 t hat there is reference of two documents, ie, Sale Deed No 169 and 160, copy of w hich is sought to be produced by the learned counsel. In that view of the matter and upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties so that the ends of justice is nor suffered, I dispose of this petition with the direction that if the petitioners want to exercise their right as conta ined under Order 8, Rule 1A(4), CPC, to hand over those documents to the defenda nt’s witnesses for refreshing their memory, the same shall be allowed to be done so that the opportunity be given to substantiate the statements made at Paragra ph- 18 of the written statement. In the event of making any prayer for allowing to refresh the memory of the petitioners, with reference to those documents, the learned Munsiff is directed to do so. With the aforesaid observations and direction, this petition stands disp osed of.