CRP 66/2011 BEFORE HON\BLE MR JUSTICE B D AGARWAL Heard Mr. GN Sahewalla, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. This revision application is at the instance of defendant, challenging the order dated 06.12.2010 passed by the learned Munsiff No.2, Nagaon in Title Suit No. 2 26 of 2006. Keeping in mind that the impugned order has been passed in an old case and also considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, it is being decided at the mot ionstage, i.e. without giving any notice to the respondent/ plaintiff. Mr. Sahewalla submitted that while giving evidence by way of affidavit, the plai ntiff introduced Exhibits. 2, 5 and 9 in the affidavit evidence. The aforesaid d ocuments were also marked accordingly. Thereafter, the defendant filed a petitio n on 17.06.2010 raising objection about admission of Exhibits 2, 5 and 9. Howeve r, the petition has been rejected through the impugned order. Mr. Sahewala submitted that since the evidence was tendered by way of affidavit, the defendant had no occasion to object the introduction of exhibits 2, 5 and 9 . Learned counsel also submitted that while dismissing the petition, learned Mun siff has given a clear finding that the aforesaid documents are admissible in ev idence, even before cross examination of the witnesses. In my considered opinion, the observations of the learned trial Judge that exhib its 2, 5 and 9 are admissible in evidence shall be considered a prima facie opi nion. In other words, the observations made by the trial court in the order date d 06.12.2010 shall not be construed as his final finding and the defendant shal l be allowed to cross examine the witnesses about admissibility of the exhibit 2 , 5 and 9 and also to give rebuttal evidence and the issue of admissibility of t he documents shall be decided at the final stage. With the aforesaid observations, the revision petition stands disposed of.