JUDGMENT Sandeep Sharma, J. - Being aggrieved and dis-satisfied with order dated 7.4.2018, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Court No IV, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P. in CMA No. 341/2017 in CS No. 70/2012, whereby an application under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) of CPC, seeking therein permission to attach certain documents in the plaint, came to be rejected, petitioner-plaintiff has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying therein to setaside impugned order. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record vis--vis reasoning assigned by the court below in the impugned order, this Court sees no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the court below, rather this Court finds from the record that prior to passing of the impugned order, plaintiff had filed similar application, which was registered as CMA No. 408/2016 in CS No.70 of 2012, under Order 7 Rule 14(3) CPC, however, same was dismissed vide order dated 31.5.2017, with costs of Rs. 1,000/- 3. Careful perusal of order dated 31.5.2017, clearly suggests that no cogent and convincing reason was adduced on record in support of prayer made in the application, rather applicant in the application, only gave detail with regard to documents sought to be attached by him with the plaint as additional documents. Even careful perusal of Annexure P-4 i.e. fresh application filed under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC, upon which, impugned dated 7.4.2018, has been passed, suggests that no reason, whatsoever, has been assigned that why documents sought to be placed on record at this stage, could not be placed at the time of filing of the plaint or before framing of issues, rather applicant/plaintiff has simply given detail with regard to documents intended to be placed by him as additional documents and as such, court below has not erred in dismissing the application. However, this Court, having taken note of the explanation rendered in present petition and on the vehement request having been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, deems it fit to grant one last opportunity to the plaintiff to move fresh application under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC, that too subject to costs. 4. However, this Court, having taken note of the explanation rendered in present petition and on the vehement request having been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, deems it fit to grant one last opportunity to the plaintiff to move fresh application under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC, that too subject to costs. 4. Consequently, in view of the discussion made herein above, present petition is allowed and impugned order dated 7.4.2018, passed by the court below is ordered to be quashed and set-aside and plaintiff is permitted to move fresh application under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC, within a period of two weeks from today that too subject to payment of costs of Rs. 15,000/-, payable to the respondents. However, it is made clear that application, if any, having been filed by the applicant/plaintiff shall be decided by the court below strictly in accordance with law without being influenced by the instant order passed by the court because by this order, this Court has only granted permission to the plaintiff to move fresh application in accordance with law. However it is made clear that application will not be entertained till the time, costs awarded by this Court, is not paid to the respondents.