JUDGMENT : Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, J. This revision petition has been filed by the plaintiff to assail the correctness of the trial court’s order dated 12.07.2017, while refusing to mark medical report bearing the Apostille certificate as exhibit on the ground that the petitioner bas already availed sufficient opportunity and has filed plethora of applications. 2. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the case is at the stage of the plaintiff’s evidence and unless the corn records a finding that the aforesaid document is either not relevant or is admissible in evidence, the court is not justified in passing the impugned order. 3. On the other hand, the learned counsel representing the respondents submits that the plaintiff has already files a plethora of applications. 4. This court has considered the submission made by the learned counsel representing the parties and analysed their arguments. 5. Once the case is pending for the plaintiff’s evidence, marking documents in evidence can be denied only when the court comes to a conclusion that such document is either not relevant or not admissible in evidence. However, the court has not adverted to these facts. Hence, the impugned order is set aside, while requesting the trial court to pass fresh order in accordance with law. 6. The revision petition stands allowed. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of.