GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA versus DEVLI KUND FOREST
O XLI, R 27 Appellate Court Production of Extra Evidence in the Jurisdiction The Appellate Court may allow additional evidence in the form of any document or witness so that it is capable of rendering a decision or at its sole discretion for any other purpose. The power had to be used judicially. In order to achieve the end of justice, the purpose of the AXLI, R27, CPC was to promote justice for the sake of justice and it should be used in the interest of justice and not in the evidence of the appellant for that purpose. Allowing the lacuna to be filled, the need for additional evidence, the court must require that a decision cannot be announced without additional documents or evidence, in the present case, the officers at the applicant's appeal stage Apparently, the need to present additional evidence was not due to the discovery of any new fact. Or that they did not know the applicants. It was also not the case of the applicants that some new document was discovered during the trial which stated that the presentation of the witnesses had to prove that the applicants had to be informed about the witnesses being employed. Did not even provide any explanation. The relevant time was not presented to the trial court if the applicant was due to his negligence, ignorance, and false legal advice. Or that any act and deception had not examined him as a witness, then said that millions could not be allowed to be summoned by the provisions of OLLI, R27, the CPC amendment was excluded. ?
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
