- (1.) Seeking quashing of order dated 29.1.2015 in Title Appeal No. 4 of 2006. whereby, application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC has been dismissed, the present writ petition has been filed. Title Suit No. 17 of 1998 was disposed of on 16.12.2005, against which Title Appeal No. 4 of 2006 was preferred by one Aisha Khatoon. The petitioners are legal heirs and successors of the said Aisha Khatoon. In Title Appeal No. 4 of 2006 an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC has been filed on 25.11.2014 for adducing additional evidence namely, Revenue Receipts, Correction Slip, Hukumnama, Khatiyan, Register etc.
(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had no knowledge of those documents. The petitioners were substituted in place of original, appellant. After the death of the original appellant when a box was broken open the petitioners found aforesaid documents and therefore, application dated 25.11.2014 was filed for adducing additional evidence. Supporting the impugned order dated 29.1.2015, the learned counsel for the respondent-DVC submits that the aforesaid documents were within the knowledge of the original appellant still she did not adduce those documents in the proceeding of Title Suit No. 17 of 1998. In application dated 25.11.2014, the petitioners have averred that after the death of the appellant her legal heirs broken open the lock of appellant's box and found certain documents which were handed over to their lawyer on 24.11.2014. From the averment made in paragraph 3 of application dated 25.11.2014 it thus appears that the aforesaid documents were within the knowledge of the original appellant. Title Suit No. 17 of 1998 was disposed of on 16.12.2005 and the Title Appeal was filed in the year, 2006 however, those documents were never brought on record. Order 41 Rule 27 provides that parties shall not be entitled to produce additional evidence whether oral or documentary in the Appellate Court. Though statutory exceptions have been carved out under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, the parties cannot be permitted to fill lacuna in their case. The Trial Court has after taking note of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court, dismissed the application dated 25.11.2014. I find no infirmity in the said order and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.;