NAND RAM Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has preferred this petition against the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, Solan allowing the application under Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C. instituted by the plaintiff-Bank for permission to lead additional Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment?yes. evidence, namely, application form for agricultural credit, loan agreement, revival letter, notice and affidavit and other documents pertaining to the loan account. The suit of the plaintiff was dismissed by the learned trial Court only on the ground that the evidence Ext.P1 is insufficient to prove the case of the Bank. In appeal, application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C. filed by the Bank has been allowed.

(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the documents cannot be allowed to be admitted in evidence for the reason that no foundation has been laid to invoke the provisions of Section under Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C., the bank has been negligent and seeks to convert the Appellate Court into Court of original jurisdiction for retrial of the case denovo.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the respondent has referred to the Constitutional Bench decision of the Supreme Court in K.Venkataramiah Vs. Setharama Reddy and others, AIR 1963, S.C. 1526, holding: