1. Heard finally by consent. Rule returnable forthwith.

2. Mr. J. Cardozo, learned counsel waives notice on behalf of the contesting respondent no.1 on merits.

3. Both these petitions are connected with each other and challenge trial Courts orders dated 2.8.2013 rejecting the applications filed under Order 14 Rule 3 of CPC for production of documents on identical grounds and, therefore, are being disposed of by this common judgment.

4. After hearing both sides, the only point that arises for consideration in this Writ Petition is:-

Whether the orders dated 2.8.2013, rejecting production of additional documents are so perverse and arbitrary as to warrant interference by this Court in exercise of Writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India?

5. On going through the impugned orders, it is seen that the only reason stated therein is that one of the documents that was sought to be produced in evidence, a plan drawn in the year 1982, did not find any mention in the plaint and this plan also did not appear to be relied upon by the plaintiffs/petitioners, as seen from the averments in the plaint.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this plan was