Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Parampreet Singh – Appellant
Versus
Gurinderpal Singh Grewal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J.
The plaintiff Parampreet Singh has instituted the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 05.09.2018 (Annexure P-15), passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Khanna vide which the application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff for additional evidence and for secondary evidence to prove DDR No.27 dated 05.05.2003 was dismissed.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the petitioner-plaintiff instituted a suit praying for a declaration to the effect that the sale deed dated 06.05.2003 pertaining to land measuring 110 Kanals 15½ Marlas (fully described in the plaint) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the suit land’), situated at Village Beer Kishan Singh Wala, Tehsil Khanna, District Ludhiana, executed by defendant No.4 (Mohan Singh Grewal) in favour of defendants No.1 to 3 (Gurinderpal Singh Grewal, Harinderpal Singh Grewal and Smt. Paramjit Kaur) was illegal, null and void and was not binding upon the rights of the petitioner-plaintiff. A further declaration was sought that the mutation sanctioned on the basis of the said sale deed was illegal and that the mortgage of the suit land by defendants
The court ruled that a trial court must provide an opportunity for additional evidence when procedural errors deny a plaintiff a fair hearing, emphasizing the case's prolonged duration warrants exped....
Parties are entitled to present evidence in rebuttal, especially when prior claims by opposing parties shift the burden of proof, emphasizing that cases should be concluded on substantive merits rath....
The purpose of the court is to do complete justice between the parties and mere technicalities should not be a stumbling block in the cause of justice.
Secondary evidence requires strict adherence to conditions outlined in Section 65 of the Evidence Act, which were not met in this case.
Additional evidence – Application for taking additional evidence on record at a belated stage cannot be filed as a matter of right.
The onus of proving the loss of the original document and the need to evaluate the evidence to establish the existence, validity, and genuineness of the agreement are crucial in allowing secondary ev....
Additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 can be permitted at the appellate stage if it is essential for a just decision, despite previous pleadings.
The discretion to allow additional evidence in appeal should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances as per the parameters set out in Order XVI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Proce....
Court upheld the use of secondary evidence to prove a will's contents, despite procedural deficiencies, affirming the trial court's discretion.
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
