ORDER 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners prays for time to argue the case. Learned counsel for the contesting respondents has opposed the prayer on the premise that the suit is held up due to interim order passed by this Court, therefore, the case may be heard and decided on merits. 2. Considered the rival submissions. 3. This writ petition has been filed in the year 2015. A Coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 3.2.2015 has stayed the suit so far as it relates to rejection of application under section 151 CPC filed by the respondent/State. The suit is of the year 1973. More than two years period has passed by. The suit is held up due to interim order operating against the parties. Hence, it is expedient to decide the writ petition. 4. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by plaintiffs is directed against the order dated 8.12.2014 passed in Civil Suit No.10-A/2013 by II Civil Judge, Class-II, Gwalior whereby the application filed by the defendant/State under section 151 CPC seeking leave of the Court to cross-examine the plaintiffs' witnesses and that of the defendants No.1 and 2 has been allowed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the trial Court has committed grave illegality while allowing the application for the following reasons; (i) admittedly, no written statement was filed by the State Government, therefore, there was no occasion for the State to cross-examine the plaintiffs' witnesses; (ii) even though this Court while disposing of Second Appeal No. 94/2000 on 24.3.2011 has allowed interlocutory application filed by the respondent-State under Order XLI rule 27 CPC to bring on record the additional evidence. This by itself shall not justify the right for cross-examination of the witnesses of the plaintiffs by the State; and (iii) considering the nature of lis between the parties, there was no reasonable justification for the State to contest the suit and for that purpose seek right of cross-examination. 6. Heard. 7. Paragraphs 20 and 21 of the judgment passed by this Court in Second Appeal No.9/2000 (supra), are relevant and reproduced as under : "20. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that defendants as well as State of M.P. have filed applications under Order XLI rule 27 CPC, before this Court (I.A.No.3260/2001, I.A.No.940/2004, I.A.No.20180/2009 and I.A.No.3175/2010) and have filed certain documents to be admitted in additional evidence. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that defendants as well as State of M.P. have filed applications under Order XLI rule 27 CPC, before this Court (I.A.No.3260/2001, I.A.No.940/2004, I.A.No.20180/2009 and I.A.No.3175/2010) and have filed certain documents to be admitted in additional evidence. Similarly the plaintiffs/appellants has submitted an application under Order XLI rule 27 CPC (I.A.No.20382/2009) before this Court, these applications are allowed and the documents are also taken on record as additional evidence. Let these applications and the documents filed along with these applications be sent to learned first appellate Court and the parties shall be free to file additional evidence in rebuttal these applications. 21. The Principal Registrar is hereby directed to check the record of the learned first appellate Court when it is being sent to that Court and should ascertain whether the applications and the documents are sent to learned first appellate Court along with its record." 8. The entire record has been sent back to the first appellate Court for decision, afresh. 9. It is apparent that the application filed by the defendant/State under section 151 CPC has been taken on record. The trial Court while considering the application has found that consequent upon remand by this Court in Second Appeal No.94/2000 (supra), has ordered that the documents filed by the State be considered by that Court for decision, therefore, it shall be in the interest of justice to allow the defendant/State to cross-examine the witnesses of the plaintiffs, on the documents so filed by the State. 10. In the opinion of this Court, the trial Court has not committed any illegality while allowing the application under section 151 CPC dated 11.11.2014 filed by the State for cross-examination of the witnesses of the plaintiffs in the context of the documents filed under Order XLI rule 27 CPC. However, it is observed that the trial Court shall always be at liberty to entertain the objections as regards admissibility of the documents so filed by the parties and the plaintiffs shall also be entitled to cross-examine the defendant/State. 11. Writ petition sans merit and is hereby disposed of with the aforesaid observation. 12. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.