2013 (9) TMI 1328

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... S.N. Bhat, Dharam Bir Raj Vohra, G.V. Chandrashekar, N.K. Verma, Anjana Chandrashekar, Girish Ananthamurthy and Vaijayanthi Girish, Advs. ORDER Leave granted. 2. Application for impleadment is allowed. 3. Having gone through the impugned judgment and order dated 26.07.2011 passed by the High Court of Karnataka in RFA No. 1765/2005, we have noticed that the judgment and decree was pass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., such evidence was not within his knowledge or could not, after the exercise of due diligence, be produced by him at the time when the decree appealed against was passed, or (b) .......... 6. On perusal of this provision, it is unambiguously clear that the party can seek liberty to produce additional evidence at the appellate stage, but the same can be permitted only if the evidence s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... disputed land. Therefore, the rejection of the application of the appellants to rely on the said map has rightly not been entertained at the stage of first appeal. The impugned order thus do not suffer from legal infirmity so as to interfere with the same. 9. However, we deem it appropriate to observe further that the appellants are Government of Karnataka and, therefore, if it is of the view ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....this Court beseeching interference with a contested decree passed in favour of the respondents. 11. It is no doubt true that the courts at times can exercise its due diligence for taking the relevant aspects of the matter while exercising its discretion for application of equity and good conscience. But, insofar as the appellants in this appeal are concerned, that also is lacking as we fail to ....