1 SB Civil Writ Petition No.9767/2008 Ram Bux. vs. Salag Ram Mohata & Ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9767/2008 Ram Bux. vs. Salag Ram Mohata and others. Date : 5.1.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.M Thanvi, for the petitioner. - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The plaintiff's/petitioner's application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC was dismissed by the Court of Additional District Judge No.1, Bikaner vide order dated 4.11.2008. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner filed photostat copy of the document in question but that was not exhibited and then, the petitioner sought permission from the first appellate court for producing the said document under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. It is also submitted that the document was not in the knowledge of the petitioner and he 2 SB Civil Writ Petition No.9767/2008 Ram Bux. vs. Salag Ram Mohata & Ors. could not file this document in original. It appears from the impugned order that the plaintiff/petitioner himself did not appear as witness in the trial court and the suit remained pending for 11 years. When the plaintiff himself did not appear in the witness box, then by this mode, he cannot seek permission to produce additional evidence which was in his knowledge and copy of which has been produced in the trial court and inspite of that, he did not gave his statement to prove the said document. In view of the above, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. Consequently, this writ petition, having no merits, is dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya