CHHOTTA SINGH Vs. BALBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the cases are connected and they are disposed of by a common order.

(2.) THE appeals against the order are for a direction for remand of the case while disposing of the appeal filed to it along with an application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. The documents sought to be produced were copies of jamabandis to establish the particular link which the trial Court had observed was not there to uphold the claim of the plaintiff for title to the property. The point in issue was whether a sale by Kehar Singh and Gurbax Singh to Gujjar Singh was the very same property which was the subject matter of suit and that proof was sought to be adduced by the production of revenue records.

(3.) THE respondent in appeal before the court below has the following objections: (i) the order has been passed disposing of the appeal along with the application without affording to the respondents in appeal to state their objections to the application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC. His further objection is that the court has only a power to either call for finding from the trial Court on the documents or he should have itself allowed for proof to be given for the additional evidence which has been filed before the appellate Court. The counsel would further argue that the document produced before the appellate Court as additional evidence ought to have been filed by the plaintiff even at the trial Court itself and there was no valid justification for its non -production at the trial. He would point out that the explanation given by the plaintiff for non -filing the same at the trial Court on account of the issue not being properly framed cannot be taken to be a valid justification.