IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.678 of 2006 MD. KHURSHEED NAWAB Versus WAHIUDDIN AHMAD & ORS ----------- 8 23.10.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. There can be no exception in law that on a proper explanation and to meet the ends of justice, the documents which are referable to the pleadings on record in a suit must be taken into record by way of evidence in accordance with law. Mr. Abbas Haider, counsel for the petitioner, fairly submits that those documents which have been taken on record by way of evidence were referable to the pleading but they were filed at belated stage. The question of delay by itself cannot be the determining factor to deprive a party to bring on record certain documents if such party satisfies the Court with regard to the necessity of such documents to be adduced into evidence. The Court below infact has given cogent reasons to allow such prayer of the plaintiff-opposite party and as such there is no jurisdictional error in the impugned order. In that view of the matter, this Court would not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. This Court however taking into account the - 2 - submissions of the counsel for the petitioner, that there has been a delaying tendency on the part of the plaintiff- opposite party would only observe that the suit being of the year, 1976 needs to be disposed of expeditiously and accordingly, the trial Court should make all possible efforts to dispose of the suit within a period of six months from the date of production of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid observations and directions this Civil Revision application is dispose of. Bibhash (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)