(CRP Nos.3523 and 4356 of 2009 are filed against the order dated 23.7.2009 passed in IA Nos.808 and 809 of 2009 respectively in OS No.285 of 2002 by the learned II-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal.

2. Since these two revision petitions arise out of the same suit, against the orders passed in two interlocutory applications, they are heard together and being disposed of by this common order.

3. The petitioner is the plaintiff and the respondent is the defendant in the suit, which is filed seeking perpetual injunction. The suit is coming up for further evidence on behalf of the petitioner/plaintiff. At that stage, the petitioner filed two interlocutory applications in IA Nos.808 and 809 of 2009. IA No.808 of 2009 was filed under Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC seeking leave of the Court to receive some additional documents in evidence and IA No.809 of 2009 was filed under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC to reopen the case and recall PW 1 for the purpose of marking the documents, which are sought to be received in IA No.808 of 2009. The Court below, by the impugned orders, dismissed both the applications. In the order passed in LA.808 of 2009, the Court below by recording a findi