Revisional jurisdiction cannot be used to stop interim consideration of additional evidence by the appellate court.

The appellate court had jurisdiction to consider whether additional evidence should be admitted under Order XLI Rule 27(b) CPC, and any challenge to the correctness of that decision on merits had to await the proper stage. The High Court erred in invoking revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 CPC against an interim order while the appeal remained pending, because the order was not without jurisdiction. The Supreme Court held that such interference was unjustified, restored the appellate court's order, and directed that the appeal be decided on its own merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to interfere with the appellate court's interim order permitting consideration of additional evidence under Order XLI Rule 27(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The additional evidence issue was within the jurisdiction of the appellate court hearing the appeal finally, and the correctness of its order on merits could be examined in accordance with law at the appropriate stage. At the interim stage, while the appeal was still pending before the appellate court, the High Court ought not to have treated the order as without jurisdiction or interfered in revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Conclusion: The High Court's interference was not justified. The appellate court's order was restored and the appeal was directed to be decided on its own merits.

---