Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Saturday, 08 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-09-26 partly_allowed

Uttaradi Mutt vs Raghavendra Swamy Mutt

Bench: 3 — A.M. Khanwilkar

In Brief

In this civil appeal concerning a property dispute between two religious mutts, the High Court allowed three applications to produce additional evidence and remanded the matter to the trial court for a fresh decision. The Supreme Court held that while the High Court was right to allow the additional evidence applications (as the documents could materially affect the parties' rights), it erred in relegating the parties to the trial court. Instead, under CPC Order 41 Rules 25 and 28, the High Court should have directed the First Appellate Court to record the additional evidence and return findings to it for final determination. The Court partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the remand and directing the High Court to properly frame issues and refer them to the First Appellate Court.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Civil Procedure Appellate Practice Evidence Additional Evidence Remand

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login