Judgment 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner is plaintiff of Title Suit No. 39/97 which was filed for partition. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 15.12.2004 passed in the aforesaid suit by which the learned Subordinate Judge II, Lakhisarai rejected his petition for marking some certified copies of documents as exhibits in the suit. 4. It is not in dispute that against that order the plaintiff-petitioner has filed a review petition in the court below which was rejected on 18.1.2005, which has not been challenged by the plaintiff-petitioner. After the said order in review the impugned order has merged with the said order and the order in review having not been challenged there is no occasion for interference in the impugned order. 5. Moreover, the aforesaid petition had been filed by the plaintiff after the evidence of the parties was closed and even the argument on behalf of defendants was completed, hence there was no occasion for ailowing any such prayer at this stage, which would have been contrary to the spirit of the recent amendment of the Code of Civil Procedure, as no valid reason has been shown for such an inordinate delay. Thus there is no illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned order and accordingly this revision is dismissed.