Narayanan Nair vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.—This Civil Revision Petition filed under S. 115 of the CPC is treated as defective by the Registry since the revision petitioner has produced two annexures along with the memorandum of that Revision Petition. The Registry relied on the directions issued by this Court on 29.5.1995 in C.R.P. No. 799 of 1995 which reads as follows:

The Filing Section shall ensure that Civil Revision Petitions either under S. 115, of the CPC or under S. 103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act are strictly in conformity with Rules of High Court of Kerala. It may be noted that there is no question of producing annexures along with the Civil Revision Petition just as in the case of Original Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, if any fresh document is Sought to be filed, it can be only in terms of Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil of Procedure and not in any other manner.

The learned Single Judge before whom this matter was listed as defective, noted that Annexures I and II produced along with this which are sought to be admitted and relied on as additional evidence. They are not new documents or evidence in the proceedings but are merely orders passed in the very same case on an earlier occasion. The learned Judge, therefore, opined that such materials can be placed as annexures and there is nothing in the afore-quoted order in C.R.P. No. 799 of 1995 which would stand in the way of such production. The learned Judge, however, noted that it may be appropriate to revisit the order on C.R.P. No. 799 of 1995 by further clarifying it, having regard to the fact that there may be recurrent situations of like nature. The matter was accordingly referred to the Division Bench and hence, it is before us.

We have heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and have taken note of different aspects which arise for consideration in the context.

Rule 45 of the Rules of the High Court of Kerala, 1971, for short, "High Court Rules", provides that a Revision Petition shall be accompanied by such documents, including certified copies etc., as are enlisted in that rule. That does not exclude producing as annexures, such materials as are already part of the records of the case and are required to be looked into for considering the Revision Petition either at the stage of admission or otherwise. As in the case in hand, earlier orders passed in the same case, either by the court of first instance or by the superior courts, may be required to be looked into even at the stage of considering a Civil Revision Petition for admission. Similarly, if a matter arises under S. 115 C.P.C. from proceedings where Commissioner''s report and other materials which are already on record would be relevant or required to be considered at admission, there is no rule which precludes the placing of such materials for consideration of the High Court as annexures to the Civil Revision Petition. All that is to be guarded is that no material to be treated as additional evidence, that is to say, evidence over and above the materials already admitted in the case, either before the court below or in higher court in an earlier round of the same litigation, should be permitted to be placed except following due procedure prescribed in Order XLI R. 27 C.P.C.

Rules 98(h) and 99(k) of the High Court Rules are also contextually instructive. When any document, or portion thereof; the construction of which is in controversy; is relevant, that may be furnished along with the paper books in civil appeals. The principle is that when documents which are already part of record become necessary for consideration before the higher courts, it is profitable to make them available since that aids better process of adjudication. Therefore, unless there is any rule or settled principle of law relating to practice and procedure, which precludes the presentation of materials which are already part of the records in a case, they need not be excluded when placed as annexures along with the Civil Revision Petition. We see no rule, practice or procedure recognised in law, providing any such exclusion. However, if any additional evidence, that is to say, evidence not already on record in the case, is sought to be brought on record in support of a Civil Revision Petition, that can be done only with the aid of an application under Order XLI R. 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The materials that may be produced along with such an application would be governed by the provisions of the Evidence Act which indisputably applies to civil cases, including civil appeals. It has also to be recalled that evidence includes primary and secondary evidence, in terms of the Evidence Act. The provisions of the Evidence Act would govern the evidence that could be sought for admission as additional evidence under Order XLI R. 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The reference is answered as above and the objection taken by the Registry is overruled. Civil Revision Petition may be numbered and listed as per roster.