CRP 185/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MUTUM BK SINGH Heard Mr. GC Phukan, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petit ioners. This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 1 4.03.2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge No.2, Kamrup, Guwahati in T.A. No.62 of 2007 rejecting the prayer of the appellants/petitioners to adduce additional evidence under order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC. Upon hearing the submissions of the learned counsel appearing fo r the petitioners and on perusal of the impugned order dated 14.03.2011 and the materials available on records, I am of the considered view that this case may b e disposed of at the motion stage. Facts, in short, leading to filing the present case is that the petitioners as plaintiffs filed a title suit being Title Suit No.134 of 1998 bef ore the trial court, i.e. the Court of Munsif No.3 at Guwahati, Kamrup, who dism issed the same. Being aggrieved by the impugned order/ decree of the learned tri al court, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the Civil Judge, Kamrup at Guwahati in TA No.62 of 2007 and the same is still pending. Pending disposal of the said appeal, the petitioners filed an applicatio n on 2nd July, 2010 under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC for allowing to adduce add itional evidence. The learned trial court dismissed the same by impugned order d ated 14.03.2011. At the outset, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners prays for allowing the petitioners to file another application under order 41 R ule 27 of the CPC admitting the facts that the application, which was filed on 2 .7.2010, did not mention the particulars of the additional evidence/documents so ught to be produced and circumstances under which those documents could not be p roduced during the course of the trial. I have carefully perused the impugned or der as well as the application dated 2.7.2010 filed by the petitioners, and am o f the view that it would meet the ends of justice in allowing the petitioners to file a fresh application under order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC giving the details o f the additional evidence/ documents and the reasons for non-production of the s ame. The appellate court, in the event of filing application afresh under order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC, shall consider the same along with the merit of the appea l pending and pass necessary orders. With the above observations, this revision petition stands dispo sed of.