Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.73 seconds)Venkatasubramaniya Chettiar (Died) vs Perumal Chettiar on 9 March, 2012
12.The Division Bench of this Court in the ruling reported in
2012 (3) CTC 160 in VENKATASUBRAMANIYA CHETTIAR(DIED)
AND TWO OTHERS Vs. PERUMAL CHETTIAR AND OTHERS, in
http://www.judis.nic.in
8
which it is held that the additional documents are relevant for
determination of issue arising between the parties then such
additional evidence cannot be refused to be received.
Shyam Gopal Bindal & Ors vs Land Acquisition Officer & Anr on 11 January, 2010
The Apex Court
has also held in the ruling reported in 2010 (2) SCC 316 in SHYAM
GOPAL BINDAL AND OTHERS Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
AND ANOTHER that additional evidence is admissible if consideration
of the same was necessary by the Court for just decision of the case.
As per the above said two consideration of additional evidence for the
purpose of arriving a just decision is permissible. In this case, the
issue applicable under Section 15(2) of the Hindu Succession Act is the
point for consideration. Hence, in my considered opinion that additional
evidence of xerox copies of 14 documents sought to be produced by
the petitioner is not necessary to arrived at just conclusion. Hence, this
petition does not deserves to be allowed and the same has to fail.
Section 100 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
1