JUDGMENT Manoj Kumar Gupta, J. By the order impugned, the Appellate Court has taken on record Paper No. 16 Ga, which is photo stat copy of a sale deed and 20 Ga, which is a report of Police Station Sahpur district Gorakhpur. The Appellate Court has held that these documents were not in existence at the time of filing of the appeal and they have been brought on record on the basis of legal advice and, therefore, these are taken on record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Lower Appellate Court has not given cogent reasons for taking on record the additional evidence. He has also placed reliance on a decision of this Court in the case of Amri Lal Versus Santosh Kumar : 2014(1) JCLR 394 wherein, this Court has held that the Appellate Court is competent to take on record additional evidence but the mere ground that it could not be filed due to mistake of lawyer, can not be made a ground for admitting additional evidence. 3. As noted above, a perusal of the impugned order reveals that at least one of the document, which is taken on record i.e. the report of the police station was not in existence at the time when the suit was decided. It came into existence after the filing of the appeal. In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order at this stage. However, it is left open to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order along with the final judgment passed in the appeal, in case, ultimately, the same goes against the petitioner and it is subjected to challenge in appeal. 4. With these observations and liberty reserved in favour of the petitioner, the petition is dismissed.