Sikkim High Court
WP(C)/29/2019 of Nar Bahadur Khatiwada (Chettri) and Anr. Vs Devi Lall Khatiwada and Ors. on 2 July 2021
COURT OF SIKKIM Record of Proceedings through Video Conferencing WP(C) No. 29/2019 NAR BAHADUR KHATIWADA (CHETTRI) & ANR. PETITIONER (S) VERSUS DEVI LALL KHATIWADA & ORS. RESPONDENT (S) For Petitioners : Mr. N. Rai, Sr. Advocate. Mr. Gulshan Lama, Legal Aid Counsel For Respondents No. :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
WP(C) No. 29/2019
Date: 02/07/2021
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR MAHESHWARI, CJ.
…
ORDER(ORAL)
This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of Indiahas been filed challenging the order dated 19.06.2019 passed by the learned District Judge, West Sikkim at Gyalshing in Title Appeal No. 02 of 2018 (Shri Nar Bahadur (Chettri) Khatiwada and another vs. Shri Devi Lall Khatiwada and others) rejecting the application under Order XLI Rule 27 of the CPC filed by the plaintiff/appellant without hearing the appeal.
After hearing learned counsel appearing on behalf of both the parties at length, the law on the point is well settled that whenever an application filed under Order XLI Rule 27 of the CPC by any of the parties at the appellate stage to take additional evidence on record, such application ought to be heard and decided at the time of final hearing of the appeal and it cannot be decided separately as decided in the present case by passing the impugned order.
In view of the foregoing,the order dated 19.06.2019 passed by learned District Judge, West Sikkim at Gyalshing rejecting the application under Order XLI Rule 27 of the CPC is hereby set aside.
In view of aforesaid, this petition is allowed and disposed of with an observation that the application filedby the plaintiff/appellant be considered and decided by the Appellate Court at the time of hearing of the appeal affording an opportunity to both parties.
Accordingly, W.P.(C) No.29 of 2019 stands disposed of.
Chief Justice