Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Devdhar Vs. Aaskaran and Another

Devdhar vs Aaskaran and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Chhattisgarh Decided Mar 22, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/952114

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chhattisgarh High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Writ Petition 227 No 181 & 182 of 2012
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Devdhar

Respondent

Aaskaran and Another

Excerpt

oral order (1) petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the first appellate court dismissing his application under order 41 rule 27 of cpc and thereafter fixing the appeal itself for final hearing. (2) learned counsel would submit that whenever an application for taking additional evidence on record is moved under order 41 rule 27 of cpc the same is to be decided along with the hearing of the appeal itself and not at an interim stage. however, ignoring the said settled position of law the first appellate court has passed the impugned order which is palpably illegal. (3) in the matter of state of rajasthan v. t.n. sahani and ors. jt 2000 (suppl.3) sc 90 the hon'ble supreme court while considering the provisions of order 41 rule 27 of cpc has held thus: "this is entirely for the court to consider, at the time of hearing of the appeal on merits, whether the documents which are sought to be filed as additional evidence, need to be looked into to pronounce its judgment in a more satisfactory manner. if that be so, it is always open to the court to look into the documents and for that purpose, amended provisions of order 41, rule 27 (b) c.p.c. can be invoked. so the application under order 41 rule 27 should have been decided along with the appeal." (4) in view of the said settled position of law, the impugned order is set aside. (5) the first appellate court is directed to reconsider the application under order 41 rule 27 of cpc and decide it along with pending first appeal itself. (6) since this order is passed at admission stage without hearing other side, the respondents would be at liberty to move an application for modification/clarification on any admissible ground. (7) with the above observation, the writ petition stands allowed.

Full Judgment

Oral Order

(1) Petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the first appellate court dismissing his application under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC and thereafter fixing the appeal itself for final hearing.

(2) Learned counsel would submit that whenever an application for taking additional evidence on record is moved under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC the same is to be decided along with the hearing of the appeal itself and not at an interim stage. However, ignoring the said settled position of law the first appellate court has passed the impugned order which is palpably illegal.

(3) In the matter of State of Rajasthan v. T.N. Sahani and Ors. JT 2000 (Suppl.3) SC 90 the Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the provisions of Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC has held thus:

"This is entirely for the Court to consider, at the time of hearing of the appeal on merits, whether the documents which are sought to be filed as additional evidence, need to be looked into to pronounce its judgment in a more satisfactory manner. If that be so, it is always open to the Court to look into the documents and for that purpose, amended provisions of Order 41, Rule 27 (b) C.P.C. can be invoked. So the application under Order 41 Rule 27 should have been decided along with the appeal."

(4) In view of the said settled position of law, the impugned order is set aside.

(5) The first appellate court is directed to reconsider the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC and decide it along with pending first appeal itself.

(6) Since this order is passed at admission stage without hearing other side, the respondents would be at liberty to move an application for modification/clarification on any admissible ground.

(7) With the above observation, the writ petition stands allowed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial