Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIKAS BAHL
Ram Chander – Appellant
Versus
Siryan alias Lado (deceased) through – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIKAS BAHL, J.
1. Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for the modification of the impugned order dated 12.10.2022 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Additional District Judge, Jhajjar to the extent that the application under Section 151 CPC filed by the petitioners may kindly be allowed.
2. A perusal of the impugned order dated 12.10.2022 (Annexure P-1) would show that the application filed by the respondent/plaintiff under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 151 CPC for additional evidence was dismissed by the 1st Appellate Court although the main appeal was still pending. In the same impugned order, the application under Section 151 CPC by the present petitioners for summoning the original record pertaining to the death of Siryan daughter of Harphool son of Shadi was disposed of.
3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case titled as “State of Rajasthan Vs. T. Sahani, reported as 2001(10) SCC 619 while relying upon an earlier judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “K. Venkataramiah Vs. Seetharama Reddy”, AIR 1963 Supreme Court 1526, had observed that the application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC should be
The court emphasized that applications for additional evidence must be considered alongside the main appeal to ensure fair adjudication, following established judicial precedents.
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 admission of additional evidence in appellate proceedings requires a clear necessity to support the main issues at hand, as per Order 41 Rule 27 CPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the judicial exercise of discretion by the Appellate Court in considering applications for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC.
Additional evidence must be evaluated during the final appeal hearing, not before, ensuring judicial rigor in respecting procedural rules.
The court affirmed that additional evidence in appellate proceedings is only permissible if necessary for a just decision, not to remedy deficiencies in the original case.
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
