MD. KAMRUJJAMAN Vs. SUKUMAR RUIDAS & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate for the parties.

(2.) In the instant revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the propriety of the Order No.18 dated 13th July, 2013 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court, Hooghly, in Title Appeal No.166 of 2010 arose out of judgment and decree dated 4th May, 2010 passed by the learned civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court, Chandernagore, Hooghly in Title Suit No.62 of 2004 has been called in question.

(3.) In the order impugned, learned court below while disposing of the application under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure rejected the same on the ground that the petitioner herein was trying to fill the lacuna to patch up the weak points in the case which cannot be entertained by him while dealing with the Title Appeal No.166 of 2010. The provisions of Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code permitted the parties to an appeal to produce additional evidence, oral or documentary, in the appellate court on the following grounds: