Back
RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY
Namsharan Dewangan – Appellant
Versus
Krishna Bai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.
Heard.
1. This second appeal has been preferred by defendants No.1 to 3 against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Civil Appeal No.166-A/2018 dated 17.05.2019 whereby the appeal preferred by defendants No.1 to 3 under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code was dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge Class-I, Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Civil Suit No.253-A/2011 dated 22.11.2018 was affirmed.
2. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/defendants No.1 to 3 would submit that the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC has been moved for taking additional evidence on the record as defendants No.1 to 3 could not produce relevant documents/the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer and certain revenue records before the learned Courts below. He would further submit that the documents go to the root of the case and they are necessary for the just decision of the case.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff would submit that the case is not yet admitted and if the case is dismissed at the ad
An application for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC must be considered at the final hearing of the appeal, not before, and concurrent findings of fact by lower courts will be upheld unl....
The court affirmed the validity of the plaintiff's title through a registered sale deed, rejecting the defendants' claims due to lack of evidence for partition and ownership rights.
Appellate court cannot admit additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC absent due diligence proof or necessity for judgment; must record reasons; erroneous allowance despite negligence and delay....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the scope of Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC, which allows the appellate court to permit additional evidence in exceptional circumstances, and the part....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the strict interpretation and application of the provisions of Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C regarding the admissibility of additional evidence in the app....
The Appellate Court cannot remand a case without meeting the specific criteria outlined in the Civil Procedure Code, particularly under Order 41, Rules 23, 23-A, or 25.
Remand orders must adhere to strict procedural requirements; mere routine remanding without due diligence in evidence withholding is impermissible.
Point of Law : Provisions of clause (b) of Rule 27 of Order 41CPC. Said rule applies when Court feels that production of any document or examination of any witness is necessary to enable it to pronou....
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
