WADGOOJI KALAR Vs. MAHADEO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole point urged by the pleader for the plaintiff-appellant is that this case should be remanded for fresh consideration after admission in evidence of a new document relating to the sale-deed of the plaintiff's old house. It is suggested that if this document were admitted, it would be possible with it and Exs. P. 1, P. 2 and P. 3, already on record, to measure exactly the dimensions and fix the site of the strip of land in dispute. Even if this be so, I can see no reason whatever for allowing such a course on second appeal.

(2.) IT is urged on behalf of the plaintiff-appellant that it was owing to a misunderstanding he did not appreciate the value of the document now referred to in para. 4 of the petition of appeal. Even if we assume this, this only proves a want of due diligence on his part. It should have occurred to him primarily when he filed the suit, that such a document was essential to support his case and, in any event, he has allowed the suit to drag on from June 1925 until the appeal was decided by the lower appellate Court on 17th November 1926, without apparently making any effort to produce the document in question.