SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 1399

2008(8) Supreme 414
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Tarun Chatterjee and Aftab Alam, JJ.
Jatinder Singh & Anr. Minor through Mother — Appellants
versus
Mehar Singh and Others — Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 5781 of 2008
Decided on : 19-09-2008

Advocates appeared:
Mrs. Amita Gupta, R.K. Talwar and S.L. Aneja, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
When an application for acceptance of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of Civil Procedure Code was filed by appellants in a second appeal, it was duty of High Court to deal with same on merits.

Headnote:Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Section 100, Order 41 Rule 27 – Appeal against Order of High Court dismissing second appeal – While deciding second appeal, High Court failed to take notice of application under Order 41 Rule 27 of <a href=act:10444>CPC and decide whether additional evidence could be permitted to be admitted into evidence – When an application for acceptance of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC was filed by appellants, it was duty of High Court to deal with same on merits – No alternative but to set aside impugned judgment of High Court and remit appeal back to it for a decision afresh in second appeal along with application for acceptance of additional evidence in accordance with law. (Paras 4 and 5)

       Facts of the Case :

        Present appeal has been filed against judgment of High Court by which second appeal filed by appellants was dismissed.

       Findings of the Court :

        Held while deciding second appeal, High Court failed to take notice of application under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC and decide whether additional evidence could be permitted to be admitted into evidence. When an application for acceptance of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC was filed by appellants, it was duty of High court to deal with same on merits. Hence impugned judgment of High Court was set aside and appeal was remitted back for decision afresh in second appeal.

       Result : Appeal allowed.

       

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and final order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Regular Second Appeal No. 4174 of 2002, by which the second appeal filed by the appellants was dismissed as the High Court did not find any substantial question of law to be decided in the aforesaid second appeal.

3. In our view, this appeal can be decided on a very short question. The trial court as well as the appellate court and finally the High Court in the second appeal dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiffs/appellants for declaration challenging the sale deed dated 29th of May, 1989, executed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in favour of respondent Nos. 9 and 10 as well as the compromise (Exhibit No. C1) dated 7th of April, 1986 in a suit title Ujagar Singh vs. Puran Singh, But it is an admitted position that before the High Court, the appellants filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure for acceptance of additional evidence, namely, documents such as certificate of Military service, voter list of concerned assembly segment for the year 1982, receipt of house tax 1988-89, payment of chaowkdra of khariff 1986, rabi 1990, rabi 1991, khariff 1992, identity card issued by Election Commission of India, Ration Card etc.

4. While deciding the second appeal, however, the High Court had failed to take notice of the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure and decide whether additional evidence could be permitted to be admitted into evidence. In our view, when an application for acceptance of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed by the appellants, it was the duty of the High Court to deal with the same on merits. That being the admitted position, we have no other alternative but to set aside the judgment of the High Court and remit the appeal back to it for a decision afresh in the second appeal along with the application for acceptance of additional evidence in accordance with law.

5. For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned Judgment is set aside. The appeal is thus allowed to the extent indicated above. There will be no order as to costs.

6. We make it clear that we have not gone into the merits as to whether the application for acceptance of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure should be allowed or not, which shall be decided by the High Court at the time of decision of the second appeal in accordance with law. We also make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the second appeal which shall also be decided by the High Court along with the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we request the High Court to dispose of the second appeal at an early date preferably within six months from the date of supply of a copy of this order to it.

7. In view of the order passed in C.A.No. of 2008 @ SLP No.18759 of 2006, Contempt Petition No.57 of 2008 is disposed of.

8. In view of our decision in the appeal itself, we do not feel inclined to entertain the Interlocutory Application filed by the petitioner during when the matter was kept for Judgment. Accordingly, the said application for interim direction is disposed of as infructuous.

***********

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top