Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.53 seconds)

G.Felshia Vasanthi vs R.Sekar @ Gunasekar on 6 December, 2010

Therefore, we allow the sale deed bearing Doc.No.538 of 1992 dated 05.01.1992 to be taken as additional document on the side of the appellant. Since the respondent has no serious objection, the said document is taken on record without formal proof. Therefore, M.P(MD)No.3 of 2011 is partly allowed only in respect of the above said sale deed. The Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in (2022)7 SCC 247 (Sanjay Kumar Singh vs. State of Jharkhand) is squarely applicable to the fact of the case. The relevant portion is extracted hereunder:
Madras High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The New India Assurance Company Ltd vs Ramjee Singh & Others on 19 May, 2023

7. It is true that the general principle is that the appellate court should not travel outside the record of the lower court and cannot take any evidence in appeal. However, as an exception, Order 41 Rule 27CPC enables the appellate court to take additional evidence in exceptional circumstances. It may also be true that the appellate court may permit additional evidence if the conditions laid down in this Rule are found to exist and the parties are not entitled, as of right, to the admission of such evidence. However, at the same time, where the additional evidence sought to be adduced removes the cloud of doubt over the case and the evidence has a direct and important bearing on the main issue in the suit and interest of justice clearly renders it imperative that it may be allowed to be permitted on record, such application may be allowed. Even, one of the circumstances in which the production of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC by the appellate court is to be considered is, whether or not the appellate court requires the additional evidence so as to enable it to pronounce judgment or for any other substantial cause of like nature.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - K P Deo - Full Document
1