Applications for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 must be decided along with the main appeal.

The petitioner filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) for the production of additional evidence in Regular Civil Appeal No. 176 of 2025.

The 7th Additional District Judge, Vadodara, vide an order dated 22.05.2026, rejected this application (Exhibit 9) during the pendency of the appeal rather than at the stage of the final hearing.

Aggrieved by this premature rejection, the petitioner approached the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

1. Whether an application for additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC should be decided independently during the pendency of an appeal or heard alongside the final arguments of the main appeal.

Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC regarding the admission of additional evidence in appellate courts.

Union of India v. Ibrahim Uddin (2012) 8 SCC 148, which holds that such applications must be heard at the time of final hearing to determine if the evidence is required to pronounce judgment.

State of Rajasthan v. T.N. Sahani (2001) 10 SCC 619, which established that deciding such applications before the appeal hearing is "inappropriate".

Criteria for additional evidence established in Malayalam Plantations Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2010) 13 SCC 487.

The High Court observed that the appellate court committed a "gross error of law" by deciding/rejecting the Exhibit 9 application prematurely.

Guided by Ibrahim Uddin, the Court reasoned that the necessity of additional evidence can only be judicially determined after the appellate court has appreciated the existing evidence on record during the final hearing.

If the court reaches a conclusion that it cannot pronounce judgment or requires the documents for any other substantial cause, only then is the application ripe for adjudication.

By deciding the matter prior to the final hearing, the lower court acted in a manner inconsistent with the settled mandate of the CPC and Apex Court rulings.

The Court held that the application under Order 41 Rule 27 (Exhibit 9) must be restored to the file of the 7th Additional District Judge, Vadodara, to be heard and decided afresh strictly along with the final hearing of Regular Civil Appeal No. 176 of 2025.

The Court clarified it did not examine the merits of the additional evidence itself, leaving that determination to the discretion of the appellate court at the appropriate stage.