19.06.2013 with the averments that the said witness was not examined during plaintiff evidence in view of the stand taken by defendant in the written statement and the suggestion put to her by the Ld. Counsel for the defendant to the plaintiff during the course of his cross-examination, but as defendant has denied execution of agreement to sell dated 19.06.2013 in the evidence led by her, so, plaintiff by examination of handwriting and fingerprint expert wants to lead evidence to rebut the stand/claim of defendant denying the execution of the aforesaid agreement to sell dated 19.06.2013, which is a material issue to be decided considering the relief sought by the plaintiff of decree for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 19.06.2013. Moreover, by leading such evidence which is relevant to the case and is not beyond the pleadings of the parties. Moreover, it has been laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palaniswamy 2011(2) CCC 823(SC)-CPC S.151- additional evidence-court can allow recall of a witness or permit fresh evidence when additional evidence, oral or documentary will(a) assist in rendering justice, (b) court is satisfied that non production earlier was for valid and sufficient reasons-court should firstly (a) award appropriate costs to the other party to compensate for the delay, (b) court to complete the case within time schedule (c) thirdly if application is found to be mischievous, or frivolous or to cover up negligence or lacunae, it should be rejected with heavy costs, (d) if ultimately court finds that such evidence was not genuine or relevant and did not warrant the reopening of case recalling the witnesses then exemplary costs can be imposed apart from ordering prosecution if it involves fabrication of evidence-evidence available earlier but not produced should not be allowed-court should reject the application if it is filed to protract the proceedings-if the evidence sought to be produced is an electronic record, the court may also listen to the recording before granting or rejecting the application. So, considering the averments made in the application and the reply filed and the documents filed on record as the leading of such additional evidence is relevant and will also help the Court to adjudicate the present suit properly and effectively.
