. The evidence of first witness of respondent no.2 was completed on 18th February, 2014. Thereafter the evidence of his second witness i.e. P.W.-2 commenced. During the evidence of the second witness, certain documents i.e. Exhibit 184 to 196 and 208 to 210 were produced. On 18th November, 2014, the applicant filed first application, being Exhibit-155, for recall of the first witness. The trial Court rejected that application by it's order dtd.17th March, 2015 with an observation that since the evidence of P.W.2 was in progress, the application for recall of P.W.1 was not maintainable at that stage. It further observed that if the applicant desired to cross-examine P.W. 1 on those documents, he may submit an application after crossexamination of P.W. 2 was complete. Thereafter on 13th January, 2017, the second application for recall at Exhibit 217 came to be filed. In that application, the applicant contended that after the evidence of P.W. 1 was complete, P.W.2 had filed several documents vide a separate list of documents, Exhibit 147 (from page 1 to 251). Apart from filing of those documents, P.W. 2 had also filed separately xerox of minutes of meeting of the various meetings of Board of Directors of respondent no.2. The applicant alleged that, the documents had deliberately not been produced through P.W.1., though copies of the documents were available when he was examined, so as to spare him of cross-examination on the documents. Also while producing the
