DIDAR SINGH Vs. DAULAT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DAULAT Ram respondent filed a suit for injunction against Didar Singh petitioner and his father Narinder Singh respondent, praying that they be restrained from interfering with his peaceful possession of the land in dispute.

(2.) THE petitioner and his father denied that Daulat Ram was in possession of the land. One of the issues framed by the trial Court reads :-

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the Daulat Ram respondent could be allowed to produce additional evidence in the appellate Court under Order 41 Rule 27. C.P.C. He sought the appointment of a Local Commissioner vide application dated 31st October, 1983 by way of additional evidence. The appellate Court could allow additional evidence by recording reasons and also to enable it to pronounce judgment or for any other substantial cause. The appellate Court has not held in the impugned order that a Local Commissioner has been appointed to enable it to pronounce judgment or for any other substantial cause and further no reason, whatsoever, has been given for his appointment.