GIRRAJ PRASAD Vs. TARA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the Petitioners have beseeched to quash and set aside the order dated 4th October, 2010 whereby the learned Additional District Judge, Gangapur, City, dismissed the application of the Petitioners filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure for taking additional evidence on record.

(2.) Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and perused the relevant material on record.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioners canvassed that the documents which they intended to bring on record, are the certified copies of plaint, written statement, the order passed by the Municipality and judgment of the Court. When the Petitioners gathered knowledge about the existence of these documents, he obtained the copies thereof from Bharatpur. He further canvassed that these documents are relevant for proper and just adjudication of the appeal. Hence, these documents are required to be taken on record as an additional evidence. The learned Counsel also contended that the appellate Court, ought to have decided this application along with the appeal, but the appellate Court decided the same prior to the decision of appeal. He cited the case of Eastern Equipment and Sales Ltd. v. ING. Yash Kumar Khanna, 2008 AIR(SC) 2360 in support thereof. He has placed reliance on the case of Arjun Singh v. Kartar Singh and Ors., 1951 AIR(SC) 193 also.