Rule 27 of CPC : Rule 27: Production of additional evidence in Appellate Court.

Explanation using Example

Example 1:

Scenario: Rajesh files an appeal in the Appellate Court against a decree passed by the Trial Court in a property dispute case. During the trial, Rajesh had attempted to submit a crucial land ownership document, but the Trial Court refused to admit it, stating it was irrelevant. Rajesh believes this document is vital to his case.

Application of Rule 27: Rajesh can request the Appellate Court to admit this additional evidence under Rule 27(1)(a), arguing that the Trial Court wrongly refused to admit the document which ought to have been admitted. If the Appellate Court finds merit in Rajesh's argument, it may allow the document to be produced as additional evidence.

Example 2:

Scenario: Priya is appealing a decree in a family inheritance case. During the original trial, she was unaware of a key witness who could testify about the deceased's intentions regarding the inheritance. Despite her due diligence, she could not locate this witness before the trial concluded. After the decree, she discovers the witness and wants to present this testimony in the Appellate Court.

Application of Rule 27: Priya can request the Appellate Court to admit the witness's testimony under Rule 27(1)(aa), demonstrating that despite her due diligence, she was unaware of the witness's existence during the original trial. If the Appellate Court is convinced that Priya exercised due diligence and the evidence is crucial, it may allow the witness to be examined.

Example 3:

Scenario: An Appellate Court is hearing an appeal in a commercial contract dispute. During the hearing, the Appellate Court realizes that a specific financial document, which was not produced in the Trial Court, is essential to understand the financial transactions between the parties and to pronounce a fair judgment.

Application of Rule 27: The Appellate Court can, on its own motion, require the production of the financial document under Rule 27(1)(b), stating that it is necessary to enable it to pronounce judgment. The Court will then record the reason for admitting this additional evidence as required by Rule 27(2).

Example 4:

Scenario: Suresh is appealing a decree in a consumer dispute case. He discovers a new piece of evidence, a receipt, which was not available during the trial because the store's records were not updated in time. Suresh had exercised due diligence but could not obtain the receipt earlier.

Application of Rule 27: Suresh can request the Appellate Court to admit the receipt as additional evidence under Rule 27(1)(aa), showing that despite his due diligence, the evidence was not available at the time of the original trial. If the Appellate Court finds his explanation satisfactory, it may allow the receipt to be produced as additional evidence.