Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 4 , 115

Law: Partition Act (IV of 1893)

Section:

  Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ---- O.XLI, R.27 --- Additional evidence --- Additional evidence could be allowed only where trial Court had improperly refused to admit evidence which ought to have been admitted or Appellate Court required such document or witness and could not pronounce judgment without such additional evidence or Appellate Court required such evidence for any other substantial cause. Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) --- ---- O.XLI, R.27 --- Additional evidence --- Power to allow additional evidence was discretionary in nature, but discretion was circumscribed by limitations specified in O.XLI, R.27, C.P.C. Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ---- O.XLI, R.27 --- Additional evidence --- Ample opportunity was available to petitioner in Trial Court to adduce evidence in support of his claim, but he failed to avail same on the pretext that original deed had been-misplaced --- Additional evidence was rightly disallowed by Appellate Court in view of the fact that in case original deed was  misplaced,  secondary  evidence  could  have  been  produced  by petitioner---Argument that fault lay with counsel for petitioner to have ignored to adduce secondary evidence in Trial Court, was not tenable in that it did not constitute a substantial cause within contemplation of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of R.27 of O.XLI, C.P.C. Partition Act (IV of 1893)--- ---- S.4 --- Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115 --- Suit for partition --- Revisional. jurisdiction, exercise of --- Plot in dispute stood recorded in name of predecessor in-interest of parties --- Concurrent findings of two Courts below that plot underneath the superstructure belonged to predecessor-in-interest of parties were unexceptionable in absence of any evidence in rebuttal --- Such presumption could not be extended any   further to hold, in absence of any evidence on behalf of plaintiffs/respondents that construction of plot in dispute was also raised by and at cost of their predecessor-in-interest --- Findings recorded by two Courts below on points as to whether or not construction of house on plot in dispute had been undertaken by…