Additional evidence in appeal requires due diligence or necessity; belated documents were rejected for want of statutory basis.

Additional evidence at the appellate stage under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC is permitted only where the trial court wrongly excluded evidence, the party shows due diligence and an inability to produce the material earlier, or the appellate court requires it to pronounce judgment or for other substantial cause. The appellants failed to give any reason for the belated request, any explanation for non-production at the earlier stage, or any demonstrated relevance and necessity of the documents. The record also did not support the claim that the Tribunal had directed filing of the relied upon documents. On these facts, the request to place additional documents on record was not maintainable and was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants should be permitted to place additional documents on record at the appellate stage under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The application sought leave to file additional documents in a pending appeal but did not disclose any reason for the belated request, any explanation why the material was not produced earlier, or any basis showing relevance and necessity. The record also did not support the appellants' assertion that the Tribunal had directed filing of the relied upon documents. Under Order XLI Rule 27, additional evidence in appeal is permissible only where the trial court wrongly excluded evidence, the party establishes due diligence and inability to produce it earlier, or the appellate court requires the material to pronounce judgment or for other substantial cause. None of these conditions was shown to exist.

Conclusion: The request to place additional documents on record was not maintainable on the facts stated and was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The appeal stage request for additional evidence failed for want of any statutory ground or demonstrated necessity, and the application stood dismissed.

---