V. NATH, J.:–Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. By the impugned order, the learned court below has allowed the prayer of the defendants for bringing on record the two documentary evidence and has accordingly marked the same as exhibits. 3. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner has submitted that the documents were already in possession of the defendants for the last 22 years and therefore, the learned court below should not have accepted the documents in evidence and marked the same as exhibits at this stage. It has also been submitted that the defendants only want to linger the proceeding of the suit. 4. After considering the submissions and perusal of the materials on record including the impugned order, it is manifest that by impugned order the learned court below has accepted the two documentary evidence in evidence for the defendants and marked the same as exhibits. This Court has not been persuaded to hold that the impugned order would prejudice the case of the petitioner and the discretion exercised by the court is arbitrary or without jurisdiction. In this backdrop, this Court is not inclined to invoke the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for interdicting the impugned order. 5. The application is, accordingly, dismissed. 6. The petitioner shall be at liberty to raise appropriate objections in accordance with law under Section 105 C.P.C. if such occasion arises.