Skip to content


Kaki Mutyalu Vs. Kanigolla Siva Raghavayya - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in32Ind.Cas.826
AppellantKaki Mutyalu
RespondentKanigolla Siva Raghavayya
Excerpt:
civil procedure code (act v of 1908), order xli, rule 27 - appellate court--new evidence, admission of, legality of. - - and the respondent's vakil is unable to suggest even now any reason to explain the plaintiff's failure to produce this document in the original court, or any ground which would have justified the lower appellate court in receiving it......on which the decision of the lower appellate court very largely proceeds, has been admitted by the subordinate judge contrary to the provisions of order xli, rule 27, of the civil procedure code.2. no application is on record for the admission of this document in the subordinate court: no reasons for its admission have been recorded as required by clause (2) of the rule above quoted: and the respondent's vakil is unable to suggest even now any reason to explain the plaintiff's failure to produce this document in the original court, or any ground which would have justified the lower appellate court in receiving it.3. the judgment of the lower appellate court reverses that of the district munsif.4. we must set aside the decree of the subordinate judge and remand the appeal for re-hearing.....
Judgment:

1. The appellant points out that Exhibit J, on which the decision of the lower Appellate Court very largely proceeds, has been admitted by the Subordinate Judge contrary to the provisions of Order XLI, Rule 27, of the Civil Procedure Code.

2. No application is on record for the admission of this document in the Subordinate Court: no reasons for its admission have been recorded as required by Clause (2) of the rule above quoted: and the respondent's Vakil is unable to suggest even now any reason to explain the plaintiff's failure to produce this document in the original Court, or any ground which would have justified the lower Appellate Court in receiving it.

3. The judgment of the lower Appellate Court reverses that of the District Munsif.

4. We must set aside the decree of the Subordinate Judge and remand the appeal for re-hearing and disposal according to law.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //