GANGADHAR MISHRA Vs. BILASHINI PANIGRAHI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition challenges the order dated 21.11.2015 passed by the learned District Judge, Puri in R.F.A. No.103 of 2009. By the said order, learned appellate court has allowed the application to adduce additional evidence.

(2.) The petitioner as plaintiff instituted T.S. No.413/94 in the court of the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Puri for specific performance of contract impleading the opposite parties as defendants. The suit was decreed. Assailing the judgment and decree of the learned trial court, the defendant no.1 filed R.F.A. No.103 of 2009 in the court of the learned District Judge, Puri. During pendency of the appeal, the appellant filed an application under Order 41, Rule 27 C.P.C. to adduce additional evidence. The same having been allowed, the instant petition has been filed.

(3.) Miss S. Pattanaik, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when an application for additional evidence is filed, the same shall be considered at the time of hearing of the appeal. But in the instant case, learned appellate court has allowed the application before the hearing has began.