Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J
Samsuddin Ansari, S/o Late Gopi Mian – Appellant
Versus
Md. Sikandar Ali, Son Of Late Munsi Mian – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.
1. This appeal has been filed challenging the part of judgment dated 28th February, 2020 [decree sealed and signed on 7th March, 2020] passed by the Additional District Judge-II, Hazaribag in Title Appeal No. 82 of 2012 whereby the appellate court partly allowed the appeal. The trial court judgement is dated 29th September, 2012 [decree sealed and signed on 12th October 2012] passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hazaribag in Title Suit No. 147/2000. The learned trial court had decreed the plaintiffs’ right, title, interest over the land of Khata No. 247, Plot No. 2447 & 2452 Area 10 decimals each of village Maskidih, P.S. Barkatha, District Hazaribag described in Schedule-I of the plaint.
2. The Schedule I of the plaint was relating to khata No. 247 plot no. 2447 (area 10 decimal) and khata no. 247 plot no. 2452 (area 10 decimal) and also khata no. 131 plot no. 2810 (area 2 decimal).
3. This second appeal was admitted for hearing vide order dated 12.06.2023 on the following substantial question of law: -
“Whether the learned first appellate court committed gross illegality by not considering the records of Case No. 524 of 1967 brought on rec
The appellate court's discretion in admitting additional evidence under Order XLI Rule 27 is affirmed, emphasizing that such evidence must be relevant to the case for it to impact the court's decisio....
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 court emphasized the requirement for additional evidence to enable it to pronounce judgment or for any other substantial cause, as per the provisions of Order XLI Rule 27 of the C.P.C. and releva....
The presumption of truth attached to revenue records can only be rebutted by evidence of impeccable integrity, and procedural fairness must be upheld in appeals.
The appellate court may only admit additional evidence under specific conditions, which were not met by the petitioners, as they failed to demonstrate due diligence in producing the evidence during t....
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
