THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1605 OF 2011 DATED:03.08.2011 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 09.11.2010, in I.A.No.791 of 2010 in O.S.No.14 of 2006 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Jagtial, Karimnagar District, wherein the said application filed by the petitioners-defendants 1 and 2under Order VIII Rule 1 A (3) CPC, seeking permission of the Court to file certain documents, was dismissed. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the records. 3. 1st respondent herein-plaintiff filed the suit for partition and separate possession against the petitioners herein. Petitioners herein-defendants 1 and 2 filed written statement contesting the suit. Necessary issues were settled. The trial of the suit also commenced. During the course of the defendant’s evidence, petitioners sought to file certain documents, namely certified copies of the registered gift deed and pahanis for the year 1985-86, 1991-92 and 1994-95. 1st respondent-plaintiff opposed the application on the ground that the petition is highly belated and the petitioners have not furnished any explanation for not filing the documents earlier and that the said documents are also not referred to in the pleadings. The trial Court dismissed the application mainly on the ground that the application was belated. 4. It is to be seen that the documents sought to be filed are certified copies of public documents, namely gift deed and three pahanis. In the affidavit, filed in support of the petition, it is averred that the petitioners did not file the documents earlier as the certified copies were obtained recently. The documents would show that the certified copies were applied for and obtained recently. There is ofcourse no reason as to why the petitioners have not applied for those documents earlier. However, having regard to the fact that the documents are only certified copies of the public documents and that they were not available with the petitioners-defendants 1 and 2 at the time of filing the written statement and that they were obtained only subsequently, it is considered that the petitioners can be permitted to file those documents so that the entire evidence is placed on record for proper adjudication of the dispute between the parties. Needless to state that the documents can be received only subject to proof and relevancy. 5. In the circumstances, with a view to provide an opportunity to the parties to place their entire evidence on record, petitioners-defendants 1 and 2 are permitted to file the documents, however subject to payment of costs of Rs.500/- ( rupees five hundred only) to the other side within a period of two weeks to compensate the delay in filing the documents. In default of payment of costs, petition shall stand dismissed. The impugned order is accordingly set aside. 6. In the result, Civil Revision Petition is allowed. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 03rd August, 2011. Tsy