MARIAMMA Vs. POULOSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order of the Subordinate Judge, Perumbavoor which is produced as Ext. P7 in this case. The petition was filed for reception of documents under O.41 R.27 of the C. P. C. as additional evidence. The Court considered and held that the documents cannot be received at that stage and therefore dismissed the application.

(2.) The learned counsel for the respondents submitted before me a decision of the Apex Court reported in State of Rajasthan v. T.N. Sahani, 2001 (10) SCC 619 . It was also a case where the reception of the document was rejected at an earlier stage before hearing of the appeal. The Apex Court held that "Application for, should be decided along with appeal considering the necessity of documents, sought to be adduced as additional evidence for pronouncing the judgment more satisfactorily". A complete reading of the decision would show that when documents are to be received under O.41 R.27(b) of CPC, in order to analyse about the importance or necessity to receive the document it is always desired that the matter is to be heard along with appeal so that the Court will have a complete picture before it regarding the facts and necessity of such documents whether to be considered for a proper determination of the matter. Therefore, I find that the Court should have considered the application along with the appeal instead of deciding it independently at an earlier stage. Therefore, the order under challenge is set aside and the petition to receive document is restored and the Appellate Court is directed to consider the acceptability or otherwise of document under O.41 R.27 along with the appeal in accordance with law.