HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.R.P.No. 2756 OF 2009 Date: 30-07-2010 Between Ch. Veera Raghava Rao ……….. Petitioner and Sri V. Venkata Subbayya and another …….. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.R.P.No. 2756 OF 2009 ORDER: This Revision Petition is filed challenging the order, dated 12-03-2009 in I.A.No.24 of 2009 in O.S.No.390 of 1997 on the file of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge (Fast Track Court), Visakhapatnam. The petitioner-plaintiff filed I.A.No.24 of 2009 before the lower Court seeking to mark the original registered sale deed, dated 26-03- 1993 in the suit filed by him. The lower Court dismissed the said application, by the order, dated 12-03-2009 holding that mere misplacement of a document for about eleven years period is not a good cause to grant leave to file the document at this belated stage and therefore, there are no tenable grounds to grant leave to the petitioner to produce the document. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner contended that in a suit, the relevant documents can be received at any stage during the course of trial, but the lower Court is not justified in dismissing the application on the ground that there was no mention in the pleadings about the period of misplacement of the document and the date on which it was traced and from whose possession it was traced and therefore, the order of the lower Court is liable to be set aside. Admittedly, the GPA holder of the petitioner-original plaintiff filed I.A.No.379 of 2008 seeking leave to file the said original sale deed and the lower Court dismissed the same on the ground that the GPA Holder is not the competent person to depose anything on the proposed document and he can exhibit the said document through proper person who got knowledge about the transaction. Now though the petitioner-original plaintiff, who has knowledge about the transaction, filed I.A.No.24 of 2009 seeking to mark the said registered sale deed, the lower Court erroneously dismissed the application. In view of the facts and circumstances, since the document was sought to be marked by the original plaintiff, the lower Court ought to have allowed the application. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the order, dated 12-03-2009 in I.A.No.24 of 2009 before the lower Court is set aside. Consequently, I.A.No.24 of 2009 stands allowed and the document in question shall be marked within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter the lower Court to dispose of the suit as early as possible preferably within a period of one month. In the circumstances, no order as to costs. ____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date: 30-07-2010 Note: Issue C.C. within one week. YCR