Dismissed¶22

Gopal S/O Baijnath Agrawal v. Kishor S/O Baijnath Agrawal, (Dead) and Others

Bombay HC27 Jan 2026WP/2337/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gopal s/o Baijnath Agrawal v. Kishor s/o Baijnath Agrawal (dead) & others, Writ Petition No.2337 of 2025, Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench, decided 27 January 2026 (Khubalkar, J.). Application to discard evidence on affidavit of defendant's witness Radheshyam Agrawal for going beyond pleadings; Exhibit 170; Special Civil Suit No.11 of 2017; Civil Judge Senior Division, Amravati; admissibility of evidence beyond pleadings deferred to stage of appreciation of evidence; no perversity in interlocutory order; writ dismissed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Evidence of a witness beyond the pleadings will not be considered to be admissible at the time of appreciation of evidence at the appropriate stage of suit. ¶22

Gopal S/O Baijnath Agrawal vs Kishor S/O Baijnath Agrawal, (Dead) and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:BHC-NAG:1604

¶2

1 50. WP 2337 of 2025.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2337 OF 2025

¶5

GOPAL S/O BAIJNATH AGRAWAL

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

KISHOR S/O BAIJNATH AGRAWAL, (DEAD) AND OTHERS

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's orders Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders

¶9

Mr. S.S. Shingane, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. P.R. Agrawal, Advocate for Respondents Nos.3 & 5.

¶10

CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.

¶11

DATED : 27^th JANUARY 2026

¶12

PER COURT :-

¶13

Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner as well as learned Advocate for the respondents.

¶14

This petition takes exception to the order dated 02.04.2025, passed by Civil Judge Senior Division, Amravati, in Special Civil Suit No.11 of 2017, at Exhibit 170, rejecting the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff, for discarding the evidence of defendants’ witness viz. Mr. Radheshyam Agrawal.

¶15

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the defendants have filed evidence on affidavit on behalf of witness by

¶16

2 50. WP 2337 of 2025.odt

¶17

name Radheshyam Agrawal, with respect to certain aspects, about which there are no pleadings in the written statement. Therefore, an attempt is made by the defendants to lead evidence beyond the pleadings and hence, an application was filed vide Exhibit 170, for discarding the evidence of said witness. He submits that, by the statements in the evidence on affidavit, a new story is sought to be introduced on behalf of the defendants and hence, the evidence is required to be discarded.

¶18

Learned Advocate for the respondents opposes the petition and submits that the application for discarding the evidence is not supported by any provisions of law and the trial court has rightly rejected the application by a well reasoned order. He submits that there are sufficient pleadings with respect to the contents in the evidence on affidavit of the said witness and as such, there is no question for discarding the evidence.

¶19

A perusal of the impugned order shows that the trial court has rejected the application by categorically observing that the evidence of the witness beyond the pleadings cannot be looked into and on that ground, it will not be legal and proper to discard the evidence. By referring to the legal position, the trial court has passed the impugned order and has rejected the application. A perusal of the

¶20

3 50. WP 2337 of 2025.odt

¶21

impugned order shows that there is no perversity with the view expressed by the trial court and the same is in tune with the position of law

¶22

It has to be noted that the evidence of a witness beyond the pleadings will not be considered to be admissible at the time of appreciation of evidence at the appropriate stage of suit. In view of this, no interference is warranted with the impugned order. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶23

(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)

¶24

asd

Gopal S/O Baijnath Agrawal v. Kishor S/O Baijnath Agrawal, (Dead) and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal S/O Baijnath Agrawal v. Kishor S/O Baijnath Agrawal, (Dead) and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shreyas S/O Ravi Dudhe, Thr. P.O.a., Sau. Sangita Ravi Dudhe vs Ravi Balaji Dudhe and Others

Akshay Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Nagpur, Thr. Manager, Sudhir Namdeorao Daware vs the Employees State Insurance Cororation, Nagpur, Thr. Director, Nagpur

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) Central Railway, Ajni, Nagpur vs Shri. Dinesh S/O Ramchandrarao Kohad and Others

Smt. Banarsibai Wd/O Jugalkishor Bajoria (Dead) Thr. Lrs. Arun Jugalkishor Bajoria and Others vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Collector, Yavatmal and Others

Sultaniya Jining Mill (Sultania Oil Industries Pvt. Ltd), Nagpur vs Ramchandra @Chandrabhan S/O Udebhan Nehare and Another

Nagnath Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Thr. General Manager, Hingoli vs Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Thr. Presiding Officer, Nagpur