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

2005 Supreme(AP) 1121

B.PRAKASH RAO, G.YETHIRAJULU
Chapala Chinnabbayi – Appellant
Versus
Naralaaetti Anusuyaina – Respondent


Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The High Court may permit a party to adduce additional evidence in a Second Appeal if it is in the interest of justice (!) (!) . - Additional evidence may be permitted in a Second Appeal regarding subsequent happenings or events that are relevant for the disposal of the appeal (!) (!) . - Parties are not entitled to adduce additional evidence in a Second Appeal as a matter of right, but the High Court may permit it in exceptional and compelling circumstances (!) . - To avoid prejudice to the opposite party when admitting additional evidence, the High Court may invoke the procedure under Order 41, Rule 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure (!) (!) . - The High Court may exercise its power under Section 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure to determine an issue of fact if the evidence on record is sufficient and the issue was not determined or was wrongly determined by the lower courts (!) (!) . - The discretion to receive additional evidence under Order 41, Rule 27 must be exercised judiciously and sparingly, not arbitrarily (!) . - The High Court may interfere with findings of fact if they are found to be perverse or based on imaginary grounds without material on record (!) . - The High Court may receive additional evidence itself if the evidence is in the form of a document that does not require formal proof (!) .

Whether additional documents regarding subsequent events can be brought on record in a Second Appeal?

What is the scope and applicability of Order 41, Rule 27 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in a Second Appeal?


G. YETHIRAJULU J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference made by a learned single Judge of this Court to answer the following questions by a Division Bench :1) Whether additional documents throwing light by way of subsequent events can be brought on record in a Second Appeal, and if so what is the scope and ambit and the applicability of Order 41, Rule 27 r/w. Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in such a case?2) Whether the view expressed by the Division Bench of this Court in Anisetti bhagyavathi v. Andaluri Satyanarayana and others, AIR 1992 Andh Pra 304 : 1992 (1) alt 455 can be extended to cases of bringing subsequent events to the notice of the high Court in Second Appeals?"

( 2 ) AN application covered by C. M. P. No. 24429 of 2002 in S. A. No. 500 of 1995 was filed under O. 41, R. 27 read with S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to receive additional documents which throw light on subsequent events in a second appeal. The learned single Judge entertained a doubt whether a Judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Anisetti Bhagyavathi s case (supra) can be applied to cases of bringing subsequent events to the notice of the Court in a second appeal. Since the learned Judge fel

































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top