4. Mr. Deshmukh, learned Advocate for the Petitioner / Plaintiff would submit that certified copy of the Mutation Entry has been taken on record and has been given a further exhibit number. However, the letter dated 07.01.2014 which has been addressed by the Plaintiff to the Collector on being apprised of the above Mutation Entry carried out behind the Plaintiff’s back has not been taken on record only on the account of delay in filing the said document. I have perused the impugned order dated 05.01.2024. Paragraph No.3 of the said order records that Plaintiff has not given any cogent reason for the delay and therefore the said letter has not been taken on record. That apart, the other reason given by the learned Trial Court is that the said letter ought to have been filed earlier by the Plaintiff and if the said letter is taken on record, the matter will have to be kept for cross-examination of the Plaintiff. On reading the impugned order dated 05.01.2024, it is seen that once the certified copy of the Mutation Entry No.16584 has been taken on record, the matter even otherwise will have to be placed for cross-examination of the Plaintiff. The letter dated 07.01.2014 is with respect to the very same Mutation Entry addressed by the Plaintiff to the Collector when the Plaintiff learnt about the said mutation having been carried out behind her back. It also bears the stamp of the Collector’s office. It refers to the said alleged Mutation Entry itself. Merely because the matter is old and pending since the year 2014, it cannot be the reason to deny the Plaintiff to place on record the
