ORDER :

The writ petition is under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, whereby and where under order dated 04.04.2017 passed in Title Appeal No.70 of 2015, by which, petition under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 151 of the C.P.C. for allowing the petitioner to file additional evidence at the appellate stage, has been rejected.

2. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner is that a suit for eviction being Title (Eviction) Suit No.50 of 2008, has been filed by the plaintiff/petitioner before the Munsif, Dhanbad praying therein a decree for ejectment of the defendant from the suit premises on the ground of default in making payment of rent under the provision of Section 11(1)(d) of the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 2001, by which, suit was dismissed, against which, title appeal has been preferred being Title Appeal No.70 of 2015 before the District Judge, Dhanbad, at this stage, a petition under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 151 of the C.P.C. and under Order 7 Rule 14(3) read with Section 151 of the C.P.C. for tendering the certified copy of the assessment list of the municipality and the certified copy of lease deed by way of additional evidence has been sought to be incorporated but the same, has been rejected vide order dated 04.04.2017, against which, the present writ petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction conferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

3. The ground as has been agitated in assailing the order dated 04.04.2017 that the said document is necessary for proper adjudication of the issue, since the appeal is in continuation with the original proceeding, therefore, the documents have been incorporated by allowing the said petition for further adjudication of the suit but having not done so, illegality has been committed by the trial Court by passing the order impugned.

4. This Court after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and going across the factual aspect involved in this case as also looking to the provision of Order 41 Rule 27 of C.P.C., whereby and where under, the provision has been made to adduce the additional evidence on the following grounds i.e.:-

(a) Whether the Court from which degree the appeal is preferred has refused to admit evidence which ought to have been admitted or

(aa) the party seeking to produce additional evidence establishes that in spite of exercise of due diligence such evidence was not within his knowledge

(b) The appellate court required any documents to be produced or any witness to be examined to enable it to pronounce judgment or for any other substantial cause.

(c) The appellate court may allow such evidence or document to be produced or witness to be examined.

5. Therefore, only if the above condition would arise, the additional evidence is directed to be incorporated by the trial Court under the provision of Order 41 Rule 27 of the C.P.C. but from perusal of the impugned order it appears that no such ground has been agitated, save and except the stand that the document is a public document, therefore, it may be incorporated.

It is evident from the impugned order that the petitioner/defendant to the title suit although has filed written statement but in support of that, no document was filed and at the stage of appeal, certain document has been sought to be incorporated but without assigning any reason and without having any ground to incorporate the additional evidence as required under the provision of Order 41 Rule 27.

6. The issue with respect to the applicability of Order 41 Rule 27 of the C.P.C. has been dealt with by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Ibrahim Uddin & Anr. reported in (2012) 8 SCC 148 (upon which the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance) has dealt with the scope of Order XLI Rule 27 wherein at paragraph-49 read with paragraph 15 to which it has been laid down therein that an appeal under Order XLI Rule 27 is to be considered at the time of hearing o