Back
NIDHI GUPTA
Kaka Singh – Appellant
Versus
Pal Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Nidhi Gupta, J. - Prayer in the present revision petition is for quashing of the order dated 27.11.2018 (Annexure P-4) passed by learned lower Appellate Court whereby application moved by the plaintiff/respondent no.1 for additional evidence has been accepted allowing him to produce on record mutation no.1908 dated 5.3.2006 BK (Bikrami Samvat).
2. Brief facts of the case are that plaintiff/respondent no.1 filed civil suit for declaration and joint possession to the extent of 1/5th share out of total land measuring 145K-15M and land measuring 0K-07M (land in dispute). It was alleged that the suit property is ancestral joint Hindu property of the parties and they are coparceners. It was further alleged in the suit that Jangir Singh, father of the parties was Karta of the families and therefore, though Jangir Singh was not entitled to, yet had suffered a decree dated 3.5.1989 in favour of Kaka Singh, present petitioner/defendant no.1 to the extent of 1/3rd share of the land. It was pleaded by Pal Singh plaintiff/respondent no.1 that the said judgment dated 3.5.1989 is liable to be set aside qua his right as he came to know about the decree after the death of Jangir Singh only a
The discretion of the appellate court to determine the necessity of additional evidence and the probative value of the evidence in arriving at a just decision.
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....
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 admissibility of public documents requires corroborative evidence to establish claims of familial relationships; civil suits challenging property mutations remain maintainable under specific prov....
The Appellate Court cannot remand a case without meeting the specific criteria outlined in the Civil Procedure Code, particularly under Order 41, Rules 23, 23-A, or 25.
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
