https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467758 Additional evidence at the appellate stage may be admitted only when the appellate court needs it to pronounce judgment or when substantial cause is shown; evidence available long before trial and omitted without explanation cannot be used to fill gaps in a party's case, so the request was rejected. Concurrent factual findings on title, based on revenue records and oral evidence, were not interfered with in the absence of perversity or legal error under Article 136. However, where the record clearly established acquisition of a limited identified portion, relief was moulded to declare the State's ownership only over that proved extent. en-us Mon, 10 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Apr 2026 18:29:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467758 Additional evidence at the appellate stage may be admitted only when the appellate court needs it to pronounce judgment or when substantial cause is shown; evidence available long before trial and omitted without explanation cannot be used to fill gaps in a party's case, so the request was rejected. Concurrent factual findings on title, based on revenue records and oral evidence, were not interfered with in the absence of perversity or legal error under Article 136. However, where the record clearly established acquisition of a limited identified portion, relief was moulded to declare the State's ownership only over that proved extent. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 10 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467758