Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri N.N. Mishra for the respondents.
(2.) Plaintiff has initially instituted a suit for declaration and injunction but later on, the prayer of declaration was deleted. The trial court rejected the suit for injunction simplicitor. An appeal has been filed, which has remained pending. An application under Order-41 Rule-27 CPC has been filed which has been rejected by the appellate court.
(3.) From the perusal of the records, it appears that the plaintiff has instituted suit for injunction with the allegation that the suit property had devolved upon him, pursuant to Will from one Gajraj. The trial court, has recorded a finding that Gajraj has no right over the suit property and he had filed a suit in 1997, which was also withdrawn. An application, therefore, has now been made by the plaintiff to bring on record certain documents to show his long standing possession. The appellate court has rejected the application by observing that necessary ingredients to attract the provisions of Order-41 Rule-27 are not in existence and, therefore, additional evidence cannot be taken on record.;