Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
VIKAS BAHL
Didar Singh (Since Deceased) Through His Lrs – Appellant
Versus
Darshan Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral)
The present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the defendant (presently through his LRs) against the judgment and decree dated 07.09.1987 whereby the suit filed by the respondents for possession of land measuring 37 kanals 8 marlas has been decreed along with the relief for recovery of Rs.9850/-. Challenge is also to the judgment and decree dated 16.03.1992 vide which the appeal filed by the present appellant has been dismissed. The present appeal has been filed under Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant has raised a preliminary point for allowing the present appeal. It is submitted that the present appellant had filed an application dated 19.03.1990 under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC for producing on record additional evidence / documents which included copy of the Central Government order directing the applicant to deposit the previous rent, in the treasury and to cultivate the land in suit in future on rent along with other important documents. It is submitted that although reply was filed to the said application but the application had not been decided by the Ist Appellate Court while dismissing the appeal f
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....
Point of Law : Provisions of clause (b) of Rule 27 of Order 41CPC. Said rule applies when Court feels that production of any document or examination of any witness is necessary to enable it to pronou....
An application for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC must be decided concurrently with the main appeal to uphold judicial efficacy and fairness.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the strict interpretation and application of the provisions of Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C regarding the admissibility of additional evidence in the app....
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
