IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.315 of 2008 SITA RAM YADAV & ORS Versus AMRENDRA NARAYAN SINGH & ORS ----------- 2 21.8.2008 Heard Counsel for the defendant -petitioner. In the opinion of this Court, when injunction was refused by the Court below and miscellaneous appeal was carried by the plaintiff opposite party to the Appellate Court, the order passed by the Appellate Court permitting the plaintiff appellant, opposite party to rely on certain documents, cannot be said to be strictly governed by the principles of Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. That being so, this civil revision application against the impugned order is wholly misconceived and must be dismissed. The plea of prejudice of the petitioner that such documents would also become referable to the suit itself is misconceived and must be rejected as it is well settled that such documents in order to be relied and referred to for deciding the suit on merit will be required to be admitted in evidence in accordance with law. At this stage, Mr. Nath has also submitted that at least when these documents have been now sought to be taken into consideration by the Appellate Court for the purposes of considering the prayer of injunction, the 2 petitioner opposing such prayer of injunction must be given a chance of rebuttal. In the opinion of this Court, such prayer of the petitioner is absolutely justified and therefore, this Court would direct the Appellate Court to take into account any document or pleadings in this respect by way of rebuttal. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this civil revision application is dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)