IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.816 of 2006 DEONANDAN ROY Versus SRI BALI RAM RAI & ORS ----------- 3. 21.10.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. This Court taking into consideration the detailed order as has been passed by the court below while rejecting the prayer of the petitioner seeking to bring document after twenty years of filing of the suit and taking into account that the petitioner is a plaintiff, would not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order, especially when the provisions made under Order 7 Rule 14 C.P.C. and Order 13 Rule 1 C.P.C. were never followed by the petitioner. That being so, this Court would not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order and accordingly, this application is dismissed. At this stage Mr. Awadh Bihari Ojha would submit that another suit of the year 1986 i.e. T.S.No. 63/1986 is pending on the same subject and if this case is made analogous to that suit, there would not be requirement of leading further evidence 2 because those documents are already on record in that case. This Court would not like to pass any order in absence of the materials of that suit and accordingly, it is only observed that it will be open for the petitioner to approach the appropriate court for making the two cases analogous and the court concerned will pass an order strictly in accordance with law. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/