CRP 412/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.P.KATAKEY Heard Mr D Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners by the present petition have sought to invoke the jurisd iction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in challengi ng the order dated 15th July 2010 passed by the learned Munsiff No.1, Nagaon in Misc(J) Case No.59/2009 arising out of Title Suit No.117/2007. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that since the pe titioners could not produce the documents on which their defence is based, at th e time required under Order 8 Rule 1A CPC, the learned court below ought to have granted the leave under Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 1-A of Order 8 of CPC to file thos e documents. It would appear from the impugned order dated 15th July 2010 passed in M isc(J) Case No.59/2009, which was registered on the basis of the petition filed by the petitioners under Order 8 Rule 1-A(3) of CPC, that the said prayer has b een rejected on the ground that no reason has been cited in the petition filed - as to why the documents sought to be filed were not filed at the time of filing of the pleadings I have perused the application filed under Order 8 Rule 1-A(3) CPC by th e petitioners/defendants in the said suit, the contents of which are quoted belo w: IN THE COURT OF MUNSIFF NO.1, NAGAON T.S. NO.117/2007. Plaintiff-Jayanta Saikia, Defendant-Kitab Ali An application filed under Order 8 Rule 1A(3) and Section 151 of the Code of Civ il Procedure. Sir, The defendants humbly beg to state that while submitting the written sta tement, the defendants submitted a set of documents along with a list. Some docu ments were, however, not given to the court at that time. Now those documents ar e being submitted to the Court for use during recording of the defence evidence. DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE DEFENCANTS 1) Certified copy of order dated 15-3-2001 in MR 166/01. 2) Certified copy of order dated 30-3-2001 in MR 166/01 3) Written deed of agreement. 4) Police report of MR 166/01. 5) Photocopy of handnote. It is therefore prayed that the defendants be allowed to submit the afor ementioned documents and oblige. VERIFICATION It is evident from the contents of the said petition that absolutely no reason is cited - as to why the petitioners could not produce the documents that are sought to be produced now, at the time of filing the written statement, tho ugh admittedly a part of their defence is based on those documents. To invoke the jurisdiction by the learned court below under Order 8 Rule 1-A(3) of CPC for granting the leave to produce any document at a later stage, good and sufficient reason has to be assigned, which is lacking in the case at h and. In view of the above, I am of the view that no illegality has been commi tted by the learned court below in passing the impugned order requiring interfer ence of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In the result, this revision petition is dismissed. No costs.