SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(All) 960

R.B.MEHROTRA
Gayatri Devi – Appellant
Versus
Additional District Judge/Special Judge (E. C. Act) – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : M.M.D. Agarwal

JUDGMENT :

R.B. MEHROTRA, J.

1. This is a writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India against the order passed by the Addl. District Judge/Special Judge, Etawah, dated 13-11-1987 dismissing the Petitioner's application for taking additional evidence in a small [cause revision pending before the judge concerned.

2. By the impugned order, the Special Judge has taken a view that in view of the Division Bench decision of this Court in Babu Ram v. The Addl. District Judge Dehradun 1983 ARC 15, the revisional court has got no jurisdiction to admit any additional evidence in a small causes revision. The question which require consideration in the present matter is whether the revisional court exercising jurisdiction u/s 25 of the provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 has got any power to admit additional evidence in the revision pending before it.

3. The Division Bench of this Court, referred to above, which has been relied upon in the impugned order, held:

Order XLI Rule 27 of the CPC confers right on a court of appeal to admit additional evidence. But, since that order has expressly been excluded from application to Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, neither. Order XLI








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top