KAMLA BAI (DEAD) Vs. JAGDEO SINGH (DEAD)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This defendants' second appeal under Section 100 of the CPC was admitted for hearing by formulating the following substantial questions of law: -

(2.) The plaintiff's suit for ejectment and arrears of rent was dismissed by the trial Court by judgment and decree dated 25-3-2000 holding that the plaintiff is not the owner of the property and defendant No.1 is the owner of the property against which the plaintiff preferred first appeal and during the pendency of first appeal, the plaintiff also filed a document i.e. demarcation report Ex.P-13 and also filed application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC for taking additional document on record, that application was heard along with the first appeal and ultimately, while delivering judgment, the first appellate Court by its judgment allowed the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC and marked the demarcation report as Ex.P-13 and thereafter, relying upon the said document Ex.P-13, in paragraph 32 of the judgment, though wrongly mentioned as Ex.P-12 which is certified copy of sale deed, held that the plaintiff is landlord and is entitled for the decree of ejectment and arrears of rent with interest against which this second appeal has been preferred.

(3.) Mr. Hari Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the appellants / defendants, would submit that the first appellate Court has misdirected itself in firstly granting application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC and thereafter, taking into account such document on record, without putting the plaintiff to prove that document and thereafter without extending the opportunity to adduce evidence to the appellants / defendants in rebuttal on the principles of natural justice, considered the said document and admitted the same as additional document and reversed the judgment and decree of the trial Court dismissing the suit, therefore, the judgment and decree of the first appellate Court is liable to be set-aside.