JUDGMENT 1. - By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has beseeched to quash and set-aside the order dated 20th May, 2006, whereby the learned Additional District Judge No.2, Kota dismissed the application of the petitioner-plaintiff filed under Order 7, Rule 14 CPC for taking certain documents on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the relevant material on record. 3. None is present for the respondents despite the service of notice. 4. The nub of the petitioner's case is that the plaintiff Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation Limited filed a suit for recovery of amount due, against which the cheques were given by the respondent-defendant and on presentation of the cheques, the cheques were dishonoured for want of sufficient funds. It is averred that the cheques could not be filed along-with the plaint on account of the fact that the plaintiff had filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of N.I. Act in the court of Magistrate having jurisdiction. There were certain vouchers and bills also, which could not be filed along-with the plaint for the simple reason that they were lying at the head office and in Kota there was only a depot. Learned counsel for the petitioner canvassed that the learned trial court dismissed the application on the ground that the documents were not filed by the petitioner-plaintiff at the relevant point of time. Learned trial court also observed that there was not even a whisper of these documents in the averments made by the plaintiff-petitioner in the plaint. Even the details were not recorded in the application and thus, the application deserved to be dismissed. The impugned order is, in-fact, devoid of merits as all these facts were not taken into consideration and in the interest of justice, the documents may be ordered to be taken on record and the impugned order may be set-aside. 5. Having considered the submissions and carefully scanned the impugned order, it is noticed that the learned trial court is found to have dismissed the application sans assigning any cogent reason. It cannot be good ground to reject the application that the documents were not filed at the relevant point of time. 5. Having considered the submissions and carefully scanned the impugned order, it is noticed that the learned trial court is found to have dismissed the application sans assigning any cogent reason. It cannot be good ground to reject the application that the documents were not filed at the relevant point of time. The documents, if are not filed along-with the plaint, there is a provision under the Civil Procedure Code that the documents can be taken on record with the leave of the Court, if a satisfactory account is given by the plaintiff. The impugned order, in these facts and circumstances, does not seem to be just and apt and deserves to be set-aside. 6. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 20th May, 2006 stands set-aside. Learned trial court is directed to take all the documents filed along-with the application dated 24th April, 2006 on record.Petition allowed. *******