Oriental Insurance Company ... vs Smt Asha Devi & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 4373 Jhar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                    M.A. No. 150 of 2015
                                                 With
                                    M.A. No. 186 of 2015
        Oriental Insurance Company Limited Branch-2,
        Ranchi............              Appellants (In M.A. No. 150/2015)
        Smt. Asha Devi & Ors............ Appellants (In M.A. No. 186/2015)
                                 Versus
        Smt Asha Devi & Ors............ Respondents (In M.A. No. 150/2015)
        Satnam Singh & Anr............         Respondents (In M.A. No. 186/2015)
                                 ......

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen Through:- Video Conferencing ......

For the Appellants : Mr. Pratyush Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ashutosh Anand, Advocate ......

I.A. No. 45 of 2019 in M.A. No. 150 of 2015

9/24.11.2021 This interlocutory application has been filed by the owner of the vehicle praying therein to bring on record some additional evidence.

This appeal is at the instance of the insurance company. By filing this interlocutory application the respondents herein, who is the owner of the vehicle, have sought leave of this Court to admit the original verification report dated 15.10.2018 and the photo copy of the driving license of the driver of the vehicle.

Mr. Ashutosh Anand, learned counsel appearing for the owner submits that the vehicle was being driven by a person having valid driving license. He submits that before the Tribunal the insurance company has not taken a plea that the driving license was fake or not valid. He submits that they have taken this ground before the appellate court, which necessitated bringing on record the report by way of additional evidence.

The provision of adducing additional evidence at the appellant stage is governed under Order XLI Rule 27 of C.P.C. Order XLI Rule 27 of C.P.C. reads as follows:-

"Order -XLI- Appeals from original Decrees:- Rule- 1-26.....

Rule 27. Production of additional evidence in Appellate Court- (1) The parties to an appeal shall not be entitled to produce additional evidence, whether oral or documentary, in the Appellate Court. But if-

(a) the Court from whose decree the appeal is preferred has refused to admit evidence which ought to have been admitted, or [(aa) the party seeking to produce additional evidence, establishes that notwithstanding the exercise of due diligence, such evidence was not within his knowledge or could not, after the exercise of due diligence, be produced by him at the time when the decree appealed against was passed, or]

(b) the Appellate Court requires any document to be produced or any witness to be examined to enable it to pronounce judgment, or for any other substantial cause,

The Appellate Court may allow such evidence or document to be produced, or witness to be examined.

(2) Whenever additional evidence is allowed to be produced by an Appellate Court, the Court shall record the reason for its admission."

From perusal of the aforesaid provision, it is quite clear that it is not by a matter of right additional evidence can be adduced at the Appellate stage. Normally, such prayer should not be entertained but if only the condition for entertaining such application is satisfied then only additional evidence can be admitted at the Appellate stage. The grounds for admitting such evidence are:-

(i) Whether the trial court refuses to admit such evidence, which ought to have been admitted.

(ii) the party seeking to produce additional evidence, establishes that in spite of due diligence, such evidence was not within his knowledge or he could not produce the documents even after exercising due diligence before the trial court.

(iii) whether the Appellate Court requires such document to be produced.

In this case, when I go through the petition, I find that none of the grounds mentioned therein are made out. Further, I find that the document, which the appellant want to bring on record, is dated 15.10.2018, whereas the judgment has been passed by the Tribunal on 25.11.2014. Further, it is admitted case that the owner has not produced any document before the trial court as exhibits nor examined any witness. He neither filed any written report before the trial court.

Considering the aforesaid facts, I.A. No. 45 of 2019 filed in M.A. No. 150 of 2015 is liable to be dismissed. Thus, I.A. No. 45 of 2019 filed in M.A. No. 150 of 2015 is hereby dismissed.

M.A. Nos. 150 of 2015 & 186 of 2015 List both these appeals under the heading for Admission.

(Ananda Sen, J) Mukund/-cp.2