Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Raj Kumar (Since Deceased) – Appellant
Versus
Krishna Devi (Deceased) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)
CM-5140-C-2023 and CM-8998-C-2023
Present applications have been filed for withdrawal of the oral statement dated 28.02.2023 as well as for recalling the order dated 28.02.2023.
Though, the said order dated 28.02.2023 was passed in the presence of the counsel for the appellants but as the appellants are not satisfied with the order and intend to argue the appeal on merits, this Court recalls the order dated 28.02.2023 and restore the appeal to its original number and status and thereby allow the said applications.
CM-5466-C-2023
Present application has been filed to amend the memorandum of appeal.
Keeping in view the facts mentioned in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, application is allowed. The amended memorandum of appeal is taken on record.
CM-5467-C-2023
The present application has been filed under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 107 of the CPC for leading additional evidence in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case.
By this application, the legal heirs of the applicant-appellant-Raj Kumar (since deceased) intend to bring on record the Mutation No. 15271, which has been recorded by the Revenue Auth
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 evidence, proper legal procedures in mutation proceedings, burden of proof in ownership disputes, and the binding nature of concurrent findings of fact in appellate courts.
Mere entries in revenue records do not confer title; to maintain a suit for declaration, a party must also seek possession.
Mutation orders require evidence of possession through lawful transfer, and failure to consider possession invalidates such orders.
Order VII Rule 14 CPC and Evidence Act Sections 65(a), 45 cannot be used belatedly to fill evidentiary lacunae; requires due diligence, notice, authentication; no supervisory interference absent perv....
Revenue authorities cannot adjudicate title disputes in mutation cases; established rights remain intact despite challenges.
The admissibility of public documents requires corroborative evidence to establish claims of familial relationships; civil suits challenging property mutations remain maintainable under specific prov....
Additional evidence cannot be admitted in appellate proceedings unless it is relevant to the pleadings and cannot be used to fill gaps in a party's case.
Amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC should not change the nature of the suit or introduce new causes of action, and must be necessary for the proper adjudication of the case wit....
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
