JUDGMENT Being aggrieved by the order dated 28.6.2005 passed by Civil Judge, Class-I, Ratlam in civil suit No. 52-A/2004 whereby the application filed· under Order 7 Rule 14 of the CPC has been dismissed, the present writ petition is filed. Short facts of the case are that respondents No.1 and 3 filed a suit for permanent injunction along with a prayer for temporary injunction. The suit was contested by the petitioners. After framing of issues an application for temporary injunction was dismissed against which an appeal was preferred which was also dismissed. Thereafter, a writ petition was filed which was numbered as 1683/2003 and was dismissed vide order dated 6.1.2004. Thereafter, amendment was made by the respondents No. 1 to 3 in the plaint and consequential amendment and also the counter claim was made by the petitioner. The application for amendment was allowed filed by the petitioners vide order dated 2.4.2005. Therefore, an application was filed for taking the document on record which was dismissed vide order dated 28.6.2005. Being aggrieved by the order. the present writ petition has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the application for production of document is rejected on the ground that the document upon which the petitioners has placed reliance is not signed by any of the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that on account of this reason the application could not have been rejected. Learned counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 3 by Mr. Y.K. Vyas submits that application under Order 7 Rule 14 of the CPC is not maintainable as the Order 7 Rule 14 is meant for plaintiff. It is submitted that application was rightly been rejected by the learned Court below. From perusal of the record, it appears that the application has wrongly been submitted under Order 7 Rule 14 of the CPC which ought to have been submitted under Order 8 Rule 1 A of the CPC. Since the amendment application of the petitioners was allowed vide order dated 2.4.2005, therefore, there is no justification in rejecting the application for production of the document on record by the learned Court below. At this stage upon filing of the document, the learned Court below is not going to decide the suit on merit finally as that stage has yet to come. At this stage upon filing of the document, the learned Court below is not going to decide the suit on merit finally as that stage has yet to come. Therefore this part of the order whereby the application filed under Order 7 Rule 14 of the CPC has been dismissed is set aside. After taking the documents on record, the learned Court below is directed to proceed with the suit on merits and shall decide the same in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs.