Ramendra Jain, J.

By this common judgment, both the above noted Civil Revision bearing Nos. 650 and 658 of 2017 are being decided together as the controversy involved therein are identical in nature. However, for the sake of convenience, facts are being taken from Civil Revision No.650 of 2017.

2. Through this petition, the petitioner has challenged order dated 11.11.2016 (Annexure P-1), whereby the application under section 151 PC filed by him for recalling RW-1 Dr. Paviter Kaur for further cross-examination, allowing him to place on record a true and correct replica of CD at Ex.P-1/12, which was not found in playable condition on account of some scratches developed therein and to check other CDs, Exhibits P-1/8, P-1/10 and Ex.PA placed on the record of the court, so as to enable him to produce correct copies of the original CDS, was dismissed by Additional District Judge, Patiala.

3. A cursory glance of averments in the application dated 01.03.2016 filed by the petitioner under section 151, CPC shows that the petitioner tendered his evidence in the trial court on 30.9.2011 by way of affidavit dated 13.04.2011. A copy of complete evidence containing 109 pages and three CDs