SUKHDEV SINGH Vs. LABH SINGH AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved that his plea for directing the receipts, which are impugned as forgery has not been considered for being despatched to FSL for scientific examination to vouch for its genuineness or otherwise. If the petitioner's request has been in the nature of adducing additional evidence, then the consideration of whether such additional evidence could be given in appeal shall be done only at the time of hearing arguments in the manner contemplated under Order 41 Rule 28 CPC. I will, therefore, not find any error in the court not taking up the application filed by the petitioner.

(2.) However, the petitioner feels frettered by the fact that in connected appeal some other parties had conceded that the document need not be sent and that is put up against the petitioner by the appellate court. I clarify that the petitioner's plea for consideration of additional evidence in the manner sought for by him cannot be foreclosed by any concession given by the other contesting defendants in the connected appeal. The petitioner will be entitled to press for his own contention in the case in which he is a party and the court shall take a decision without in any way being influenced by the previous order passed pursuant to the alleged concession made by the other defendants.

(3.) The revision is disposed of with the above directions.