CRP.Nos.1792 and 1793 of 2012 are filed against Orders, dated 14-03-12012, in IA.Nos.33 and 31 of 2012 respectively in OS.No.184 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Proddatur.

The parties are common in both these cases. The petitioner filed the above-mentioned suit for permanent injunction against the respondents. After the petitioner’s side evidence was closed and respondent No.1 was examined, the petitioner has filed IA.No.31 of 2012 for reopening the suit for adducing further evidence and IA.No.33 of 2012 for permission to file two sale deeds, dated 27-12-2001 and 25-01-2002. Both these applications were dismissed by the lower Court.

The petitioner has stated in his affidavit filed in support of the applications that during the course of evidence of respondent No.1, he has concentrated upon and made certain depositions on the boundaries; that later on, he has searched for and found the documents, which contained the boundaries, and that, as there is some variation in the boundaries, it is necessary for filing those documents to explain the variations.

In my opinion, reasons on which the applications filed by the petitioner are