SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(Ori) 47

S.C.MOHAPATRA
MRUTUNJOY LENKA – Appellant
Versus
GAGAN KISHORE SWAIN (DEAD) – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.C.PATNAIK, K.C.LENKA, L.MISHRA, N.P.Parija

S. C. MOHAPATRA, J.


( 1 ) REJECTION of an application for adducing additional evidence before delivery of judgment by the appellate Court is grievance of the appellant-petitioners in this Civil Revision.

( 2 ) FOR the purpose of considering whether additional evidence is to be entertained by the appellate Court, first it is to be examined whether the evidence sought to be adduced is relevant and admissible. If admissibility of document would require proof through oral evidence, court is to consider whether such opportunity is to be given. This would depend upon three circumstances as indicated in Order 41, Rule 27, C. P. C. Where a party was not in possession of the additional evidence at the time of trial, he can be given opportunity to bring in the same to record and for the purpose of bringing them to record, court is to assist that party. Where despite the evidence being produced court refused to entertain the same, appellate Court can give opportunity to the party for bringing the materials to record in accordance with law. The third ground is a discretion of the court. Where appellate Court feels that for proper adjudication of the suit the materials ought to be entertained,



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top