ORDER 1. Heard on the question of admission. 2. The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 10.10.2014 whereby the application filed under Order 8 rule 1-A (wrongly mentioned as under Order 8 rule 11) of the CPC has been dismissed. 3. The respondent/plaintiff filed the civil suit for declaration, possession and permanent injunction against the present petitioner in the year 2014. The present petitioner filed the written statement on 17.7.2014 without any document. On 10.9.2014, he filed an application under Order 8 rule 11 seeking permission to file document mentioned in the list attached with the application. The respondent/plaintiff filed the reply to the application and opposed the same. Vide the impugned order dated 10.10.2014, the learned trial Court has rejected the application as he has not mentioned any reasons for non filing the documents along with the written statements. The trial Court has fixed the case for plaintiff's evidence. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the present petition before this Court. Vide order dated 19.1.2015, this Court has stayed the further proceedings of the civil Suit while admitting the writ petition. 4. It is correct that the present petitioner has not assigned any reason in the application that as to why he could not file any documents alongwith the written statements. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at that time, the petitioner remained under custody for the period since 26.2.2014 to 19.6.2014 and initially after release from jail, he filed the reply on 17.7.2014, within two months, he filed an application for taking the documents on record. Meanwhile, the trial Court has framed the issues. The petitioner has not assigned any reason in the application, but he has annexed a list of documents alongwith the application. The evidence of the plaintiff could not be started as this Court has stayed the further proceedings of the case. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the evidence of the plaintiff has not been started so far. Since the petitioner has filed an application immediately after filing the written statement under Order 8 rule 1-A(3) of CPC, the Court is having power to grant permission to file the documents which ought to have been produced alongwith the written statements. 7. Since the petitioner has filed an application immediately after filing the written statement under Order 8 rule 1-A(3) of CPC, the Court is having power to grant permission to file the documents which ought to have been produced alongwith the written statements. 7. Since the proceedings have been stayed by this Court, the plaintiff has not filed any application for vacating the stay so far, therefore, in the interest of justice, the impugned order is set aside. The application filed by the petitioner is allowed and the documents are taken on record. 8. The suit is pending since 2014, therefore, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the hearing and decide the suit preferably within a period of six months from today. The petitioner is directed to co-operate with the Court and not to seek unnecessary adjournment. 9. With the aforesaid, the petitions stands allowed with cost of Rs.3,000/- payable to the plaintiff.