Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
Hirdesh
Uma Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
Brijmohan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the factual background and civil suit details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. appellant's challenge to remand order under order 41 rule 27. (Para 6) |
| 3. requirements and principles regarding additional evidence in appellate courts. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 17) |
| 4. analysis and critique of the first appellate court's remand decision. (Para 18) |
| 5. conclusion to set aside the impugned judgment and restore the appeal. (Para 19 , 20) |
ORDER :
Hirdesh, J.
This misc. appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(u) of CPC has been filed by appellant- defendant No.2 assailing the impugned judgment and decree dated 24-07-2019 passed by Second Additional District Judge, Karera, District Shivpuri in Regular Civil Appeal No.22-A of 2016, whereby the appeal filed by respondents no.1 and 2/plaintiffs has been allowed and while allowing the application of plaintiffs under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC, the judgment and decree dated 06-02-2016 passed by Additional Civil Judge, Class-I, Karera, District Shivpuri in Civil Suit No. 55-A of 2013 has been set aside and the matter has been remanded to the trial Court for fresh adjudication.
(2) Necessary facts for disposal of present appeal, in short
Remand orders must adhere to strict procedural requirements; mere routine remanding without due diligence in evidence withholding is impermissible.
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 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.
Amendments under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC are strictly scrutinized, especially after trial commencement, and remands should only occur under justifiable circumstances, not routinely.
The appellate court must provide cogent reasons for remanding a case, and it should decide based on existing evidence if sufficient, rather than remanding without due justification.
An application for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC must be considered at the final hearing of the appeal, not before, and concurrent findings of fact by lower courts will be upheld unl....
The court affirmed the validity of the plaintiff's title through a registered sale deed, rejecting the defendants' claims due to lack of evidence for partition and ownership rights.
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
