Gujarat High Court rejects journalist Ravi Nair's plea to produce additional evidence in Adani defamation case

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 3 November 2026

Case: Ravi Nair v. Adani Enterprises Ltd.
Court: High Court of Gujarat
Bench: Justice S.V. Pinto
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 123
Decided: 15 March 2024
Statutes: Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s.Order XLI Rule 27
Source: LiveLaw

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

In Ravi Nair v. Adani Enterprises Ltd., the Gujarat High Court (Justice S.V. Pinto) on 2024-03-15 rejected journalist Ravi Nair's application under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to produce additional evidence in an appeal against a defamation suit filed by Adani Enterprises Ltd.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

Additional evidence under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, can only be permitted if the appellate court requires it to pronounce judgment, or if the party shows due diligence and the evidence was not available earlier, or if the trial court wrongly refused to admit it.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates must demonstrate that additional evidence is 'required' by the appellate court for judgment or that it was unavailable despite due diligence. Litigants should ensure all necessary evidence is presented at the trial stage to avoid rejection at appeal.

Key Legal Takeaways

1Applications for additional evidence at the appellate stage are strictly construed.
2The 'due diligence' requirement under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC is critical.
3Evidence must be 'required' by the court, not merely desired by a party.

The Legal Issue Journalist Ravi Nair filed an application under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to produce additional evidence in an appeal before the Gujarat High Court. The appeal arose from a defamation suit filed by Adani Enterprises Ltd. against Nair. Nair contended that the additional evidence was necessary to substantiate his defence and that it could not have been produced earlier despite due diligence.

Court's Reasoning The Gujarat High Court, through Justice S.V. Pinto, rejected Nair's application. The Court reiterated the strict conditions for admitting additional evidence at the appellate stage under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC. It held that such evidence can only be allowed if the appellate court itself requires it to pronounce judgment, or if the party demonstrates that despite due diligence, the evidence could not be produced at the trial stage, or if the trial court wrongly refused to admit it. The Court found that Nair failed to satisfy these conditions, particularly the requirement that the evidence was 'required' by the court for a proper adjudication of the appeal, or that he exercised due diligence in attempting to produce it earlier.

What Follows The Gujarat High Court dismissed Ravi Nair's application for additional evidence. The appeal against the defamation suit will now proceed based on the evidence already on record, without the inclusion of the newly sought documents. This decision means that the appellate court will review the trial court's judgment based solely on the material presented during the original proceedings.