Additional Evidence cannot be produced at Appellate Stage without fulfilling any of the conditions mentioned in Or.41 R 27; SC [Read Judgment]
9 years, 3 months ago

Additional Evidence cannot be produced at Appellate Stage without fulfilling any of the conditions mentioned in Or.41 R 27; SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has held in a recent judgment that parties to a civil litigation are not entitled to produce additional evidence, whether oral or documentary, in the appellate court, but for the three situations contemplated in Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.The Supreme Court also held that it was improper for the High Court in exercise of. The Supreme Court also held that it was improper for the High Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction to interfere with an order of the lower appellate court allowing an application for additional evidence at the interim stage when the appeal was pending for final hearing before the appellate court. Examining the scope of the exercise of revisional jurisdiction in the matters of acceptance of additional evidence by the lower appellate court, the Apex Court referred to its earlier decision in Gurdev Singh and others v. Mehnga Ram and another, 6 SCC 507 wherein it was held that the approach of the High Court in revision at that interim stage when the appeal was pending for final hearing before the learned Additional District Judge was not justified and the High Court should not have interfered with the order which was within the jurisdiction of the appellate court. But at this interim stage, the High Court should not have felt itself convinced that the order was without jurisdiction.” Keeping in view the law laid down by the Court regarding exercise of revisional powers in the matter of allowing the application for additional evidence, when appeal is pending before the lower appellate court, the Apex Court set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court but in order to do complete justice between the parties, proceeded to direct the first appellate court to decide the application for additional evidence afresh in the light of observations made by the Court regarding principles on which such an application can be allowed or rejected.

History of this topic

Parties In Appeal Not Entitled To Produce Additional Evidence As A Matter Of Right, Only Permitted In Exceptional Circumstances: Gujarat HC
4 months ago
Civil Procedure Code | Appellate Court Can't Create New Case For Parties & Frame Issues Without Following Order XLI : Supreme Court
6 months, 3 weeks ago
O.41 R.27 CPC | Appellate Court Cannot Dispose Of Application For Production Of Additional Evidence Before Final Hearing: Patna High Court
7 months, 3 weeks ago
O.47 R.27 CPC | While Court Can't Usually Record Additional Evidence At Appellate Stage, Ceratin Exceptions Are Carved Out For Doing So: J&K High Court
1 year ago
Applications Filed For ‘Clarification/Addition’ While Evading The Recourse Of Review, Should Be Discouraged: Supreme Court
1 year, 7 months ago
Inadvertence To Produce Document Not Substantial Cause To Invoke Order XLI Rule 27 CPC: Jammu & Kashmir High Court
1 year, 11 months ago
Stage Of Defendant Producing Documents Under Order VIII Rule 1A(3) CPC Distinct From Tendering Additional Evidence Under Order XLI Rule 25: Sikkim High Court
2 years ago
CPC Order 41 Rule 23A - Appellate Court Can't Remand Suit For De Novo Trial Merely Because A Particular Evidence Has Not Been Adduced : Supreme Court
2 years ago
Order XLI Rule 25 CPC | Party Can't Amend Plaint In Court's Limited Jurisdiction To Determine Additional Issues Framed By Appellate Court: Sikkim HC
2 years, 7 months ago
Decree Is Ex-Parte In Nature If Defendant Could Not Adduce Evidence After Filing Written Statement: Andhra Pradesh High Court
2 years, 7 months ago
Revisional Jurisdiction Is Not Meant To Test The Waters Of What Might Happen In The Trial: Delhi High Court
2 years, 10 months ago
Order 41 Rule 27 CPC - True Test Is Whether Appellate Court Can Pronounce Judgment Without Considering Additional Evidence Sought To Be Adduced: Supreme Court
3 years ago
CPC Order VIII Rule 1| Belated Filing Of Documents By Defendant Not Permissible Without Leave Of Court: Delhi High Court
3 years, 1 month ago
"Reduces Litigation To Gambit": Supreme Court Deprecates 'Disturbing Trend' Of Filing Miscellaneous Applications Seeking Modification Of Its Judgments
3 years, 5 months ago
CPC - Application To Amend Admissions Can Be Entertained Even After Judgment Is Reserved Under Order XII Rule 6 : Delhi High Court
3 years, 7 months ago
Article 136: Pure Question Of Law Can Be Raised For The First Time In SLP: Supreme Court
3 years, 7 months ago
Appellate Court's Jurisdiction Under Section 96 CPC Involves Rehearing On Questions Of Law As Well As Fact: Supreme Court
4 years, 1 month ago
First Appellate Court Should Comply With Requirements Of Order XLI Rule 31 CPC Even While Affirming Trial Court Judgment: SC [Read Judgment]
5 years, 1 month ago
Section 34 Arbitration Act- Additional Evidence Can Be Adduced Only In Exceptional Cases: SC [Read Judgment]
5 years, 6 months ago
SC Again Reminds High Courts About Limitations While Considering Second Appeals [Read Judgment]
6 years ago
When Can Appellate Court Allow Plea For Adducing Further Evidence: SC Explains [Read Judgment]
6 years, 1 month ago
Writing 50 pages order for dismissing Appeal in limine by High Court, itself shows there are arguable points: SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 8 months ago
Interim order cannot be passed in a Second Appeal by deferring admission without formulating substantial question of law; SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 11 months ago
Interim order cannot be passed in a Second Appeal by deferring admission without formulating substantial question of law; SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 11 months ago
Additional Evidence cannot be produced at Appellate Stage without fulfilling any of the conditions mentioned in Or.41 R 27; SC [Read Judgment]
9 years, 3 months ago
High Court cannot reverse a Judgment without formulating a substantial 'Question of Law' in a Second Appeal; SC [Read Judgment]
9 years, 4 months ago
High Court cannot re-appreciate evidence while exercising Revisional Jurisdiction; Constitution Bench [Read the Judgment]
10 years, 6 months ago

Discover Related