Back
B. V. L. N. CHAKRAVARTHI
Peddi Venkataravamma – Appellant
Versus
Chinnam Viswanadham – Respondent
ORDER (COMMON)
Heard Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the revision-petitioner/plaintiff in C.R.P.No.2704 of 2015 and appellant/plaintiff in C.M.A.No.527 of 2015 and Sri K.Rama Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4 and Sri Ch.Ramesh Babu, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 in both C.R.P.No.2704 of 2015 and C.M.A.No.527 of 2015.
2. C.M.A.No.527 of 2015 is directed against the Judgment, dated 27.04.2015 passed in Appeal Suit No.12 of 2013 on the file of XVI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nandigama, preferred against the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.381 of 2003, dated 28.02.2013 passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nandigama.
3. C.R.P.No.2704 of 2015 is directed against the Order, dated 27.04.2015 passed in I.A.No.914 of 2014 in A.S.No.12 of 2013 on the file of XVI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nandigama.
4. The revision-petitioner in C.R.P.No.2704 of 2015, and appellant in C.M.A.No.527 of 2015 is the respondent/plaintiff in I.A.No.914 of 2014 in A.S.No.12 of 2013; respondent/plaintiff in A.S.No.12 of 2013 on the file of XVI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nandigama and plaintiff in O.S.No.381 of 2003 on the fil
Production of additional evidence – Where additional evidence sought to be adduced removes cloud of doubt over the case and evidence has a direct and important bearing on main issue in suit, such app....
The appellate court may allow additional evidence under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC if it is necessary to arrive at a just conclusion on the main issue.
Additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC must be considered at the final hearing of an appeal, not prior.
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 admit additional evidence to fill gaps in a party's case; the party must demonstrate due diligence in presenting evidence at the trial stage.
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
