•CT%'\ -^. Petitioner Piaintiff Present: CS' WntPetitjonfCl No. S471 of 2008 Devendra Kumar Agrawal, S/o. Shn Santosh Agrav/al, agsd 255 years, Firm Goyai Vastra Mela, G.E_._ Road, Janta Markst, Power House P.S. C-hhawanj, Bhiiai, Djstt. Durg (CG). Versus 1. Commissioner - Municipa! Corporation, ihllai, Distt. Durg (CG). 2. State of Chhattisgarh, through Durg, Distt. Durg (CG). •it Petition under Articie 227 of Constitution of india) SB: Hon'ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Sh" P.R. Patankar, counsel for the petifioner. Shri H.B. Agrawal, Sr. counsel with Ms. Rinki Tamrakar, counsel for the respondent No.1. Shrl A.S. Kachhawaha, Dy. Advocate Genera! for the (Passed on this 30 day of September, 2008) With the consent of ieamed counsei appearing for the parties, the matter is heard finaliy. 2) The petitioner, by this petition, chalienges validity and iegality of the orders dafed 26-3-2008 & 2-9-2008 passed by the First Civil Judge, Ciass-S, Durg, i'n Civi! Suit No. 30-A/2006, whereby the appiication of e petitioner to ^f '.. . - exhibit certain documents, v/hfch are afready on record, was rejected. 3) !n normal circumstances, when all the evidences are eoncluded, it shouid not be permitted. 4) Mr. Patankar, iearned counsei appearing for the petittoner submits that the documents have alreadv been fited and same are to be exhibited ui!?4Bri»? U" i keeping In view the fact that it was objected durlng cross examinatlon by the .iS. 5) Be that as it may, the ultimate goa! is suiss&rvance of the justice and statutory iimitation should not be overstepped. Grant of relief wili depend upon the factuaS back-ground involved in each case. The Court undoubtediy would take into consideration the qusstions of serious mjustice or irreparabte loss, but nevertheless shoufd bear in mind that purposs and uttlmate goal is administration of iustice. (Sse Boiiepancta P. Poonacha and another Vs. K.M. Madapa (2008 (5) SCJ 409). 6) in view of the foregoing, the impugned orders dated 26-3-2CX38 & 2-9- 2008 are quashed. The Court beiow is directed to exhibit the documents already filed by the petitioner and proceed with the trial, in accordance with 7) Accordingly, the petition stands also stands disposed of. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge •'St JliiiB^'^J. i U:^ il:-!li:~\J; '--..