Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
R.K.PATTANAIK
Jagat Jivan Pani – Appellant
Versus
Sarita Pani – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to refusal of rebuttal evidence. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. nature of the suit and evidence consideration. (Para 4 , 8) |
| 3. arguments for necessity of rebuttal evidence. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. implications of court’s power to permit evidence. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. court's order to allow rebuttal evidence. (Para 12 , 14) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Instant petition is filed by the petitioner assailing the impugned order as at Annexure-5 passed in connection with the suit in CS No.111 of 2019 by learned Senior Civil Judge, Bhubaneswar, whereby, an application as per Annexure-3 seeking rebuttal evidence by him in the facts and circumstances of the case was declined on the grounds inter alia that such a decision is not in accordance with law, hence, to be interfered with and set aside in the interest of justice.
3. Heard Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the opposite parties.
5. Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only possible plea to oppose the request of the petitioner is that plaintiff No.2 was cross-examined by them and hence, there is no need to adduce rebuttal evidence but what has been elicited in cross-examination is in r
Rebuttal evidence may be presented even after closure of evidence if necessary to ensure fairness and justice in legal proceedings.
A party's right to lead rebuttal evidence is forfeited if not reserved before the opposing party begins their evidence, as per Order 18 Rule 3 CPC.
A plaintiff cannot lead evidence in rebuttal as a matter of right on an issue the onus of which is on a defendant, and must reserve the right to do so when his evidence is closed.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principle of res judicata in the context of allowing rebuttal evidence and the relevance of documents previously allowed by ....
The court has the discretion to allow a party to lead additional evidence in the interest of justice, subject to conditions and costs, even after the conclusion of the evidence and before the final a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the provisions of Order XVIII Rule 3 of the CPC and the determination of what qualifies as rebuttal evidence in a civil suit.
A party in a civil suit has the right to lead rebuttal evidence on issues where the burden of proof lies on the opposing party, even if the party has the burden of proof on other issues.
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
