The Division Bench of the Supreme Court consisting of Justice M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna opined that the admissibility of additional evidence does not depend upon the relevancy to the issue on hand, or on the fact, whether the applicant had an opportunity for adducing such evidence at an earlier stage or not, but it depends upon whether or not the appellate court requires the evidence sought to be adduced to enable it to pronounce judgment or for any other substantial cause.
Facts
Notification u/s 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (‘1894 Act’) was issued proposing to acquire the land of the original landowner for public purpose. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded a total compensation of Rs.92,121/- for the entire acquired land. A reference u/s 18 of the 1894 Act at the instance of the landowner came to be rejected.
Procedural History
Feeling dissatisfied with the award passed by the Reference Court refusing to enhance the amount of compensation, the appellant herein– land owner (original claimant) preferred an appeal before the High Court Before the High Court, the appellant herein filed an application for additional evidence under O41R27 of the CPC and proposed to bring on record certain sale deeds and the certified copy of the award passed in Land Acquisition Cases, which, according to the appellant, were relevant for the purpose of determining the fair market value. The said application was dismissed by the High Court. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant herein (original claimant) preferred the present appeal.
Observations of the Court
The Bench observed that:
“The only evidence produced on record was the sale deed which was rejected from being considered. As such, there was no other evidence/material on record to arrive at a fair market value for the acquired land.
It is true that the general principle is that the appellate court should not travel outside the record of the lower court and cannot take any evidence in appeal. However, as an exception, O41R27 CPC enables the appellate court to take additional evidence in exceptional circumstances. It may also be true that the appellate court may permit additional evidence if the conditions laid down in this Rule are found to exist and the parties are not entitled, as of right, to the admission of such evidence.
The admissibility of additional evidence does not depend upon the relevancy to the issue on hand, or on the fact, whether the applicant had an opportunity for adducing such evidence at an earlier stage or not, but it depends upon whether the appellate court requires the evidence sought to be adduced to enable it to pronounce judgment or for any other substantial cause… the High Court has not at all adverted to the aforesaid relevant consideration, i.e., whether the additional evidence sought to be adduced would have a direct bearing on pronouncing the judgment or for any other substantial cause. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court ought to have allowed the application for additional evidence.”
Judgment
Application filed before the High Court for adducing additional evidence under O41R27 CPC was allowed. The appellant was permitted to bring on record the documents as additional evidence, but the same must be proved by the appellant before the Reference Court, in accordance with law and only thereafter and after proving the existence, authenticity and genuineness of the said documents including contents thereof, the same can be taken into consideration by the Reference Court. Consequently, the impugned order passed by the High Court dismissing the appeal was quashed and set aside.
Case Name: Sanjay Kumar Singh vs The State of Jharkhand
Citation: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1760 OF 2022
Bench: Justice M.R. Shah, Justice B.V. Nagarathna
Decided on: 10th March 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
