additional document, as Ext.A11. The document produced is the copy of the petition in M.C.No.261 of 2013, which is pending before that court itself. The Family Court allowed the interim application and marked Ext.A11, as it was not opposed from the side of the petitioner herein. According to the petitioner, it was on the basis of a concession made by the counsel who was appearing for the petitioner before that court, the said document was accepted. Petitioner contents that the concession was made by the counsel without any proper inspections from the petitioner and was without her authority. Therefore the petitioner filed an application to review the order through which Ext.A11 was admitted in evidence, as I.A.No.615 of 2018. The respondent filed objections to the said interim application. The Family Court after considering the matter had dismissed the review petition by observing that, at the time when Ext.A11 was admitted in evidence, there was no opposition from the side of the petitioner. It is further observed that, the case of the respondent is that the document marked is very essential for arriving at a decision in this case. It was found by the Family Court that there exists no error or mistake
