JUDGMENT : Mr. Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 16.01.2024 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Malpura, District Tonk (for brevity, "the learned trial Court") in Civil Suit No.62/2016 whereby, an application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff (for brevity, "the plaintiff") under Order 7, Rule 14 (3) read with section 151 CPC has been dismissed. 2. The relevant facts in brief are that the plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory injunction and permanent injunction against the respondents/defendants (for brevity, "the defendants") wherein, he filed an application as aforesaid which has been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 16.01.2024. 3. Assailing the order, learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that while dismissing the application, the learned trial Court did not appreciate that the delay in filing the application was well explained. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed, the order impugned dated 16.01.2024 be quashed and set aside and the application filed by him under Order 7, Rule 14 (3) read with section 151 CPC be allowed. 4. Heard. Considered. 5. While dismissing the application, the learned trial Court has observed that evidence of the plaintiff was closed on 08.08.2018 and an earlier application dated 03.10.2019 filed by the plaintiff under Order 7, Rule 14 (3) CPC seeking leave of the Court to tender the documents in rebuttal to the documents submitted by the defendants along with their application dated 25.09.2019 filed under Order 8, Rule 1 CPC which was allowed by the learned trial Court, was allowed by it vide order dated 27.07.2022. It is further observed that on 09.01.2023, defendants' evidence was closed and the case was fixed for final arguments. On 05.04.2023, arguments were heard in part and the case was fixed for remaining arguments and judgment; but, thereafter, the plaintiff filed an application under sections 151 and 153 CPC and four dates thereafter, the instant application was filed on 25.08.2023 stating therein that since, after closing his evidence, the defendants' documents have been taken on record, it was imperative for him to submit the subject documents in rebuttal. The learned trial Court while dismissing the application further observed that the subject documents were already in existence and could have been produced by the plaintiff earlier as well; but, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is reflected that the application has been filed with malafide intention to delay trial. This Court has also gone through the application filed by the plaintiff and finds it to be bereft of any reason as to why the subject documents were not produced at the relevant time or at least along with the earlier application filed by him under Order 7, Rule 14 (3) CPC on 03.10.2019 except making a bald statement that the delay occurred on account of lack of knowledge. Further, although, it is stated in the subject application that the documents were being tendered in rebuttal to the documents submitted by the defendants along with their application under Order 8, Rule 1 CPC; but, the earlier application filed by the plaintiff under Order 7, Rule 14 (3) CPC tendering documents in rebuttal was already allowed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 27.07.2022 and thereafter, the defendants did not file any application under Order 8, Rule 1A (3) CPC giving rise to an occasion to the plaintiff to submit the instant application. Therefore, the reason assigned in the application is found to be wholly misconceived and fallacious. 6. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court finds no justification to interfere with the well reasoned order passed by the learned trial Court based on material on record in exercise of its judicious discretion and is satisfied that the application is not bona fide. 7. Resultantly, this writ petition is found to be wholly frivolous and is dismissed with a cost of Rs. 5000/- which shall be deposited by the petitioner with the Litigants Welfare Fund within a period of four weeks from today. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.