Supreme Court sets aside High Court judgment for failing to consider application for additional evidence: Jatinder Singh vs. Mehar Singh (2008)

Introduction

Date of the Judgment: September 19, 2008

Judges: Tarun Chatterjee, J., Aftab Alam, J.

When a party presents additional evidence in a second appeal, is it the duty of the High Court to consider such evidence? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case where the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed a second appeal without considering the appellant’s application for acceptance of additional evidence. The Supreme Court found this to be an error and remitted the case back to the High Court for reconsideration. The bench comprised Justice Tarun Chatterjee and Justice Aftab Alam.

Case Background

The case originated from a suit filed by the plaintiffs/appellants challenging a sale deed dated May 29, 1989, and a compromise (Exhibit No. C1) dated April 7, 1986, in a suit titled “Ujagar Singh vs. Puran Singh.” The trial court, appellate court, and the High Court dismissed the suit. Before the High Court, the appellants filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) seeking acceptance of additional evidence, including:

• Certificate of Military service
• Voter list of the concerned assembly segment for the year 1982
• Receipt of house tax 1988-89
• Payment of chaowkdra of khariff 1986, rabi 1990, rabi 1991, khariff 1992
• Identity card issued by the Election Commission of India
• Ration Card

Timeline:

Legal Framework

The central legal provision in this case is Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). This rule allows an appellate court to admit additional evidence under specific circumstances. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that the court has all necessary information to make a just decision.

Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure states the conditions under which additional evidence can be presented in appellate court. It provides that:

1. The court from whose decree the appeal is preferred has refused to admit evidence which ought to have been admitted, or
2. the appellate court requires any document to be produced or any witness to be examined to enable it to pronounce judgment, or
3. for any other substantial cause, the appellate court may allow such evidence or document to be produced, or witness to be examined.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

1. Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the second appeal without considering the application filed by the appellants under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure for acceptance of additional evidence.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court: “The following table demonstrates as to how the Court decided the issues”

Judgment

The Supreme Court held that the High Court had erred in not considering the application for additional evidence filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Court stated:

“While deciding the second appeal, however, the High Court had failed to take notice of the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure and decide whether additional evidence could be permitted to be admitted into evidence. In our view, when an application for acceptance of additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed by the appellants, it was the duty of the High Court to deal with the same on merits.”

The Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the High Court and remitted the appeal back to it for a fresh decision, directing the High Court to consider the application for acceptance of additional evidence in accordance with the law.

The Court clarified that it had not gone into the merits of either the application for additional evidence or the second appeal itself, leaving those decisions to the High Court.

Key Takeaways

• The High Court must consider applications for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure on their merits.
• Failure to consider such applications is a legal error that can result in the judgment being set aside.
• Appellate courts have a duty to ensure that all relevant evidence is considered to reach a just decision.

Conclusion

In Jatinder Singh & Anr. Minor Through Mother vs. Mehar Singh and Others, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of appellate courts considering applications for additional evidence. By setting aside the High Court’s judgment and remitting the case for reconsideration, the Supreme Court reinforced the principle that all relevant evidence must be considered to ensure a fair and just outcome.

Category

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Order 41 Rule 27, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Civil Law

Appeals

Additional Evidence

FAQ

1. What is Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure?

   Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure allows an appellate court to admit additional evidence if the lower court refused to admit evidence that should have been admitted, or if the appellate court requires additional evidence to pronounce judgment.

2. What happens if the High Court does not consider an application for additional evidence?

   If the High Court fails to consider an application for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27, the Supreme Court may set aside the judgment and remit the case back to the High Court for reconsideration.

3. What type of documents can be submitted as additional evidence?

   Additional evidence can include documents such as certificates, voter lists, tax receipts, identity cards, and ration cards, among other relevant documents.