Back
ARUN KUMAR JHA
Sushil Jha – Appellant
Versus
Fudan Kumar Jha – Respondent
JUDGMENT (CAV)
The instant petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 10.01.2024 passed by learned Sub Judge 1st, Pupri, Sitamarhi in Title Suit No. 38 of 2019 whereby and whereunder the application filed by the defendants/petitioners under Order VIII Rule I-A(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short “the Code”) was rejected.
2. The conspectus of the case is that the petitioners are defendants in Title Suit No. 38 of 2019 filed by the plaintiff/ respondent for recovery of possession of part of survey Plot No. 1226 having an area of 1300 sq. link (Kari), situated in the Village-Adhgaon, Hanuman Nagar, Post Office-Saura, Anchal and Police Station-Nanpur, District-Sitamarhi from the defendants petitioners and for mesne profit and for other reliefs. It transpires that the plaintiff has filed the suit claiming that he is the owner of above noted suit land and has got the land is his share after partition among his ancestors and brother. His brother has built his house on his share in Khata No. 479, Khesra No. 1226 from south side and he also constructed his house in the year 1987 on the part of the aforesaid land from south side and
Production of documents – Every party should get opportunity to lead his best evidence – Relevance of documents could be examined by trial court.
The court established that procedural delays should not prevent the introduction of relevant evidence, prioritizing substantial justice.
A person who has knowledge of the facts stated in an affidavit is competent to swear an affidavit and file it in support of an application, even if the person is not a party to the suit.
The court established that additional evidence cannot be admitted in appellate proceedings if the party had prior opportunities to present it, and that the appointment of a commissioner should not be....
The court upheld the trial Court's dismissal of applications to introduce documents due to lack of valid grounds for delay, affirming the importance of timely evidence submission under procedural rul....
The court affirmed that previous orders rejecting applications for scientific measurement in ongoing litigation are final and cannot be re-agitated, emphasizing the principles of res judicata and tim....
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
