NON-REPORTABLE  

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.5781 OF 2008 [ Arising out of SLP (C) NO. 18759 of 2006]  

Jatinder Singh & Anr. Minor Through Mother                   …

Appellants

VERSUS

Mehar Singh and Others  

…Respondents

      WITH

CONTEMPT PETITION © NO.57 of 2008  IN SLP©NO.18759  OF 2006

Balbir Singh & Anr.           ..Appellants

Versus

Jatinder Singh & Anr.       …Respondents

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. This  appeal is  directed against  the judgment  and  final order

passed  by  the  High  Court  of  Punjab  and  Haryana  at

Chandigarh in Regular Second Appeal No. 4174 of 2002,  by

which the second appeal filed by the appellants was dismissed

as the High Court did not find any substantial question of law

to be decided in the aforesaid second appeal.

1

1

3. In  our  view,  this  appeal  can  be  decided  on  a  very  short

question.   The trial  court  as  well as  the appellate court  and

finally the High Court in the second appeal dismissed the suit

filed by the plaintiffs/appellants for declaration challenging the

sale deed dated 29th of May, 1989, executed by the respondent

Nos. 1 to 3 in favour of respondent Nos. 9 and 10 as well as

the compromise (Exhibit No. C1) dated 7th of April, 1986 in a

suit  title Ujagar Singh vs. Puran Singh, But it is an admitted

position  that  before  the  High  Court,  the  appellants  filed  an

application  under  Order  41  Rule  27  of  the  Code  of  Civil

Procedure  for  acceptance  of  additional  evidence,  namely,

documents such as certificate of Military service, voter list of

concerned  assembly  segment  for  the  year  1982,  receipt  of

house  tax  1988-89,  payment  of chaowkdra  of khariff  1986,

rabi  1990,  rabi  1991,  khariff  1992,  identity  card  issued  by

Election Commission of India, Ration Card etc.   

4. While deciding the  second  appeal,  however,  the High Court

had failed to take notice of the application under Order 41 Rule

27  of  the  Code  of  Civil  Procedure  and  decide  whether

additional  evidence  could  be  permitted  to  be  admitted  into

evidence.  In our view, when an application for acceptance of 2

2

additional  evidence under  Order  41  Rule 27  of the  Code of

Civil Procedure was filed by the appellants, it was the duty of

the High Court to deal with the same on merits. That being the

admitted position, we have no other alternative but to set aside

the judgment of the High Court and remit the appeal back to it

for  a  decision  afresh  in  the  second  appeal  along  with  the

application for acceptance of additional evidence in accordance

with law.

5. For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned Judgment is set aside.

The  appeal  is  thus  allowed  to  the  extent  indicated  above.

There will be no order as to costs.

6. We make it clear that we have not gone into the merits as to

whether the application for acceptance of additional evidence

under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure should

be allowed or not, which shall be decided by the High Court at

the time of decision of the second appeal in accordance with

law.  We also make it clear that  we have not gone into the

merits of the second appeal which shall also be decided by the

High Court along with the application under Order 41 Rule 27

of  the  Code  of  Civil Procedure.  Considering  the  facts  and

circumstances  of  the  case,  we  request  the  High  Court  to 3

3

dispose of the second appeal at an early date preferably within

six months from the date of supply of a copy of this order to it.

7. In  view  of  the  order  passed  in  C.A.No.  of  2008  @

SLP©No.18759 of 2006, Contempt Petition © No.57 of 2008

is  disposed of.  

8. In  view of our  decision in  the appeal  itself, we do not  feel

inclined to entertain the Interlocutory Application filed by the

petitioner  during  when  the  matter  was  kept  for  Judgment.

Accordingly,  the  said  application  for  interim  direction  is

disposed of as infructuous.     

………………………J. [TARUN CHATTERJEE]          

New Delhi         ………………… …….J. September 19, 2008.           [AFTAB ALAM]                

4

4