Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Isha Kanta Baruah Since Deceased Rep By His Legal Heirs Smt. Hemlata Baruah, (W/o. Late Isha Kanta Baruah) – Appellant
Versus
Jadumani Dutta, S/o. Late Someswar Dutta – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.)
Heard Ms. A. Bhattacharyya, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. None appears on behalf of the respondent inspite of notice being served.
2. The petitioners herein have assailed the order dated 04.10.2023 passed in Title Suit No.235/2015 by the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.2, Dibrugarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Trial Court’) whereby the learned Trial Court had framed two additional issues vide the impugned order and further permitted the defendant who was the counter claimant to adduce additional evidence.
3. This Court has duly taken note of that prior to the framing of the additional issues vide the order dated 04.10.2023, the suit was at the stage of arguments and both the plaintiff as well as the defendant had already adduced evidence.
4. This Court further has perused the provisions of Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of the Civil Procedure, 1908 which permits the Court to frame any issue prior to the passing of the decree. Therefore, as regards framing of additional issues vide the impugned order dated 04.10.2023 requires no interference. However, this Court finds no justification in the ord
Court may allow framing of additional issues but must require justification for receiving further evidence after both parties have presented their respective claims.
The court upheld the Trial Court's discretion to permit additional evidence, emphasizing the requirement for cross-examination rights for the defendants to ensure procedural fairness and justice.
Judicial discretion permits amendments to pleadings if justified, aiming for effective dispute resolution while maintaining procedural integrity.
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.
The court emphasized that additional evidence may only be permitted under exceptional circumstances, not as a routine, and evaluated the impact of delay on justice delivery.
In counter-claim scenarios, a plaintiff has the inherent right to lead rebuttal evidence after the defendant's evidence, regardless of prior explicit reservation, as per procedural rules.
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
