High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCR/6145/2016disposed of

Ravinder Kumar And ANR v. Sahab Singh And ORS

2019-01-23Mr. Justice Amit Rawal2 pages

YOGESH SHARMA 2019.01.28 10:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-6145-2016 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CR-6145-2016 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.01.2019 Ravinder Kumar and another ... Petitioners

Versus

Sahab Singh and others ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Suman Jain, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. D.S. Rawat, Advocate for respondent Nos.1, 3, 5 to 7.

**** AMIT RAWAL, J. (ORAL) The short point involved in the present revision petition is whether during the pendency of the appeal, application for additional evidence at the instance of the respondents-plaintiffs can be allowed without deciding the appeal. The answer is 'No' as the law on this proposition is settled by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Malayalam Plantations Ltd. V/s State of Kerala and another 2011 AIR SC 559.

The lower Appellate Court ought to have decided the application along with the appeal and after hearing the arguments on main appeal, could have afforded the opportunity, but not in the manner and mode.

Resultantly, the impugned order, under challenge is not

YOGESH SHARMA 2019.01.28 10:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-6145-2016 (O&M) sustainable in the eyes of law being perverse and erroneous, thus, the same is hereby set aside. The lower Appellate Court is directed to decide the appeal along with the application for additional evidence. With the aforesaid observations, the present revision petition stands disposed of.

23.01.2019 Yogesh Sharma ( AMIT RAWAL ) JUDGE  Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/ No  Whether Reportable Yes/ No