JUDGMENT - M.S. RATNAPARKHI, J.:---An order passed by the Second Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nagpur on 4-1-1985 below Exhibit 33, rejecting the plaintiff's application for leave to produce documents on record has been challenged in this revision. 2. The plaintiff-Bank, who is the petitioner in this case, instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 5,00,000/- and odd against the defendants. Along with the plaint, the plaintiff filed extracts of the accounts (but without any certificate appended thereto as required by the Bankers' Book Evidence Act) and Xerox copy of a letter addressed by the plaintiff to the defendants filed a written statement. The parties went to trial. P.W. 1 was examined by the plaintiff and while he was under the cross-examination, some questions were asked to him. Therefore, during the course of cross-examination, the plaintiff filed Exhibit-33 before the trial Court seeking leave of the Court to produce five documents including the two filed along with the plaint. The other three consisted of a pay-in-slip dated 29-8-1980 in respect of Rs. 6,770/-, clearing slip cheques received by the plaintiff from the main office dated 29-10-1979 and clearing slip cheques received by the plaintiff from the main office dated 31-10-1979. It was the contention of the plaintiff that in view of some of the questions put to the witness in cross-examination, it was necessary to file these documents. 3. This application came to be opposed by the defendants. The main objection was that these documents were neither produced along with the plaint, nor were relied upon as required by Order 7, Rule 14(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. It was contended that these documents could not be allowed, at such a belated stage. The trial Court was much impressed with this objection and ultimately he rejected this application. It is this order of rejection which gives rise to this revision. 4. Mr. shareef, the learned advocate for the petitioner, has strenuously urged before me that the plaintiff felt the necessity for filing these documents for the first time after its witness was put some questions in the cross-examination. There appears to be much substance. In any case these documents were being produced before the defendants stepped into witness box. These are the documents to which the defendants are not completely the strangers. No surprise is likely to be thrown if these documents are allowed to be produced. There appears to be much substance. In any case these documents were being produced before the defendants stepped into witness box. These are the documents to which the defendants are not completely the strangers. No surprise is likely to be thrown if these documents are allowed to be produced. The plaintiff will take the burden of proving these documents as required by law. Mere production of these documents in itself cannot be barred so as to defeat the ends of justice. My attention was invited to Order 18, Rule 17-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. Mr. Bhangde, however, fairly conceded before me at the stage of arguments that he does not press the point that there was no good cause shown for filing the documents late. 5. The order of rejection of documents does not appear to be sound inasmuch as serious prejudice is likely to be caused to the trial by not allowing these documents. It is true that all these documents were in possession of the plaintiff throughout and the plaintiff should have filed these documents long before the commencement of the trial, but as Mr. Shareef has stated, the necessity to file these documents arose only because of some questions put in the cross-examination. From that point of view only the trial Court was not justified in rejecting these documents on a very technical ground. 6. The revision, is, therefore, allowed. The order passed by the trial Court below Exhibit-33 is hereby set aside. The application Exhibit-33 is allowed. The plaintiff shall be allowed to file these documents on record and the Court shall accept these documents on record. The plaintiff shall, however, pay the costs of Rs. 150/- for filing the documents late. These costs shall be paid on the day when both the parties appear before the trial Court. The trial Court is now directed to proceed with the trial according to law. Both the parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 29-1-1988. Rule is made absolute in terms above. There shall be no orders as to costs. Revision allowed. -----