The Supreme Court of India, in a recent judgment dated 22 August 2025, has set aside a Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Iqbal Ahmed (Dead) by LRs. & Anr. vs Abdul Shukoor. The Apex Court remanded the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration, holding that the appellate court erred in allowing additional evidence without first examining whether such evidence was supported by pleadings.
Case Background
The dispute arose from an agreement dated 20 February 1995, where the defendant, Abdul Shukoor, had agreed to sell his house property for ₹10,67,000. The plaintiffs paid ₹5,00,000 in two installments. Since the defendant failed to execute the sale deed, the plaintiffs filed a suit for specific performance in 1996.
Read also: Supreme Court Allows Victim’s Heir to Continue Appeal in 1992 Haridwar Murder Case
The Trial Court decreed the suit in 2000, holding that the plaintiffs had proved the agreement and their readiness to perform the contract. However, the High Court reversed this decision in 2008 after permitting the defendant to produce additional documents, including tax records and encumbrance certificates. The High Court concluded that the agreement was not genuine and ordered only repayment of ₹1,00,000 loan taken by the defendant.
The appellants contended that the High Court wrongly allowed additional evidence without giving them an opportunity to counter it. They stressed that the trial court had already examined the matter thoroughly. They also cited judgments highlighting the problem of delays in delivering reserved judgments.
On the other hand, the respondent argued that the High Court was justified in accepting additional public documents, as they revealed that no immovable property was sold by the plaintiffs as claimed.
Read also: Supreme Court Clarifies Execution of Consumer Forum Orders in Palm Groves Case
Justice Atul S. Chandurkar, delivering the judgment, observed:
“Before permitting additional evidence under Order XLI Rule 27(1) CPC, the appellate court must examine whether such evidence is consistent with the party’s pleadings. In the absence of proper pleadings, allowing additional evidence is a futile exercise.”
The Court referred to precedents like Bachhaj Nahar vs Nilima Mandal and Union of India vs Ibrahim Uddin to emphasize that pleadings are essential for admitting additional evidence.
Read also: Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging MIDC’s Land Allotments to Educational Institutions
The Supreme Court found the High Court’s judgment unsustainable in law. It set aside the order dated 30 December 2008 and remanded the case back to the High Court for fresh consideration of both the appeal and the application for additional evidence. The Court also directed the High Court to expedite the matter since the suit was originally filed in 1997.
The appeal was allowed, with parties directed to bear their own costs.
Case Title: Iqbal Ahmed (Dead) by LRs. & Anr. vs Abdul Shukoor
Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 10458 of 2010
Date of Judgment: 22 August 2025
