STATE OF ORISSA Vs. TRILOCHAN SENAPATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Second Appeal has been admitted on the substantial question of law and, the relevant question as per Ground No. 3 reads as hereunder : 'Whether the appellate Judge is justified in law in decreeing the suit of the plaintiff by accepting additional evidence against the appellant without giving them an opportunity of adducing rebuttal evidence ?'

(2.) PLAINTIFF is Respondent No. 1. He filed Title Suit No. 124 of 1979 in the Court of Munsif, First Court, Cuttack, inter alia, praying for confirmation of possession, alternatively for recovery of possession and for permanent, injunction restraining defendant Nos. 1 to 4 from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 5 and 6. Plaintiff claimed the said land for himself as well as for the defendant Nos. 5 and 6. The disputed land is described in the Schedule 'A' of the plaint, which reads as hereunder:

(3.) It appears from the trial Court's record that both the parties adduced oral as well as documentary evidence. Plaintiff examined two witnesses and tendered Exts. 1 to 10/a as documentary evidence. Defendant examined seven witnesses and tendered Exts. A to M/l as oral and documentary evidence.