Back
ARUN KUMAR JHA
Birbal Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Umesh Yadav – Respondent
Arun Kumar Jha, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioners on the point of admission and I intend to dispose of the instant petition at the stage of admission itself.
2. The instant petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioners for quashing the order dated 11.09.2023 passed in Title Appeal No. 01 of 2020 by the learned Additional District Judge-II, Jamui whereby and whereunder the application under Order 41, Rule 27 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) filed by the petitioners for bringing additional evidence on record has been rejected.
3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts of the case are that the petitioners were plaintiffs before the learned trial court and their ancestors had filed Title Suit No. 02 of 2012, which was dismissed and decreed against the petitioners. Aggrieved by the dismissal of title suit, an appeal was preferred by the petitioners. During pendency of the appeal, petitioners filed an application for amendment which was allowed vide order dated 22.10.2022 at the cost of Rs. 10,000/-. By way of the said amendment, paragraph-3 of the plaint was amended an
The court affirmed that additional evidence in appellate proceedings is only permissible if necessary for a just decision, not to remedy deficiencies in the original case.
Additional evidence must be evaluated during the final appeal hearing, not before, ensuring judicial rigor in respecting procedural rules.
The admission of additional evidence in appellate proceedings requires a clear necessity to support the main issues at hand, as per Order 41 Rule 27 CPC.
Additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC must be considered at the final hearing of an appeal, not prior.
The appellate court must consider applications for additional evidence at the time of hearing the appeal, ensuring relevance to the case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the judicial exercise of discretion by the Appellate Court in considering applications for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC.
An appellate court must consider applications for additional evidence alongside the appeal to ensure accurate judgment, as early disposal contradicts procedural intent.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
