C O M M O N O R D E R

These three civil revision petitions are preferred by the Plaintiff.

2.The suit has been presented for a mandatory injunction to re-

move a fence and also for the purpose of restoration of a pathway. The parties completed their pleadings on 10.12.2016. Three months there- after, a communication was addressed from Noorul Islam Jumma Palli- vasan. Since the pleadings were completed and the evidence had com- menced, an application was filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 14 (2) of CPC to receive the additional document.

3.Apart from that, the petitioner also wanted to reopen the evi-

dence and to recall DW2 for the purpose of examination. The said appli-

cation was dismissed against which the present civil revision petition.

4.Heard Mr.R.Gunaraj, learned Counsel for the petitioner. The respondents though served, have not entered appearance. A perusal of the record shows that the commencement of the suit itself was only in the year 2016. Whereas the document has come into force pending the litigation. Whether a post litem document will be helpful or not is for the court to decide at the time of the final disposal of the suit. To a party who has approached the court