UTTARADI MUTT versus RAGHAVENDRA SWAMY MUTT

UTTARADI MUTT versus RAGHAVENDRA SWAMY MUTT

The High Court was correct in allowing respondent's applications for additional evidence under Order XLI Rule 27, subject to proof, but erred in remanding the suit to the trial court for fresh decision. Instead, the High Court should direct the First Appellate Court to record additional evidence, determine its genuineness and contents, and report findings to the High Court, which will then decide the second appeal.

Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Uttaradi Mutt; Respondent/defendant: Raghavendra Swamy Mutt
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment, Post Remand Order
Outcome
Appeal disposed of; impugned High Court judgment set aside in part (direction remanding to trial court quashed), matter restored to High Court for points framing and evidence procedure.
Legal Topics
Order XLI Rule 27 Additional Evidence, Order XLI Rules 23, 23 a, 25 29 Remand, Adducing Evidence, Injunction Suits
Civil Procedure Order XLI Rule 27 Additional Evidence Order XLI Rules 23, 23 A, 25 29 Remand, Adducing Evidence Injunction Suits

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Uttaradi Mutt

Appellant/plaintiff

Raghavendra Swamy Mutt

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment, Post Remand Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was justified in allowing respondent's applications under Order XLI Rule 27 for additional evidence
  2. 2 Whether the High Court was justified in remanding the suit to the trial court for fresh decision after allowing additional evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court was correct in allowing respondent's applications for additional evidence under Order XLI Rule 27, subject to proof, but erred in remanding the suit to the trial court for fresh decision. Instead, the High Court should direct the First Appellate Court to record additional evidence, determine its genuineness and contents, and report findings to the High Court, which will then decide the second appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed of; impugned High Court judgment set aside in part (direction remanding to trial court quashed), matter restored to High Court for points framing and evidence procedure.

Orders

  • High Court to frame points for additional evidence to be produced by respondent.
  • First Appellate Court to record additional evidence, determine genuineness, authenticity, and contents, return evidence and findings to High Court.