Back
S. SOUNTHAR
Saraswathi (died) – Appellant
Versus
Thangavel – Respondent
ORDER :
(Prayers: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC, praying to set aside the orders of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge of Coimbatore, dated 10.11.2020 in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in A.S.No.41 of 2018 and allow the above Civil Revision Petition.
Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of CPC, praying to set aside the orders of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge of Coimbatore, dated 10.11.2020 in I.A.No.2 of 2019 in A.S.No.41 of 2018 and allow the above Civil Revision Petition.)
1. These Civil Revision Petitions are filed challenging the order passed by the First Appellate Court allowing the applications filed by the petitioners to produce additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC and lead oral evidence by examining legal representatives of attestors to Will dated 19.07.1966.
2. The petitioners herein filed a suit for partition against the respondents. The respondents 1 and 2 who were arrayed as defendants 3 and 4 filed their written statement and resisted the suit inter alia by relying on the Will executed by Subbaiya Gounder dated 22.07.1965 in favour of their mother Kuppathal. A certified copy of the Will was marke
The production of additional evidence, such as the original Will and examination of legal representatives of the attestor, may be allowed to ensure complete adjudication of a dispute.
The appellate court cannot admit additional evidence to fill gaps in a party's case; the party must demonstrate due diligence in presenting evidence at the trial stage.
Defendants claiming title via Will must prove it as per law; plaintiff's production application premature.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility of secondary evidence, specifically the photocopy of a Will, and the requirement to prove the signature of deceased attestors. Th....
The admissibility of additional evidence at the appellate stage depends on whether the appellate court requires the evidence to enable it to pronounce judgment or for any other substantial cause.
The court affirmed that allowing additional evidence is within the inherent powers of the court under Section 151 of the CPC, provided it serves the ends of justice and is not actuated by malafide in....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the enabling power of the Appellate Court to allow additional evidence for any substantial cause and the need for such evidence to pronounce jud....
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
