G. Someshwar Rao Vs Samineni Nageshwar Rao

G. Someshwar Rao filed a suit for eviction against Samineni Nageshwar Rao claiming title and seeking possession of the suit property. The trial court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff. The appellate court reversed the decree holding the plaintiff not entitled to possession. The High Court dismissed the second appeal. In appeal before the Supreme Court, the Court considered subsequent events including renovation of the building by the respondent-plaintiff and held that courts can take notice of subsequent events to do complete justice, especially when the impugned judgment cannot be sustained. The Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment, allowed the appeal, restored the plaintiff's entitlement to possession, permitted the respondent to file an application for recovery of renovation expenses (to be considered on merits), and directed determination of mesne profits with adjustment of amounts payable between parties.**

- Courts may take judicial notice of subsequent events to impart complete justice and mould relief accordingly, even in rare cases, if the goal is justice: G. Someshwar Rao v. Samineni Nageshwar Rao, (2009) 14 SCC 677, Para 37.

- The right of an accused to lead defence evidence including expert examination is not absolute and must be exercised bona fide to further justice, not to delay proceedings; successive applications for the same purpose indicate dilatory intent: G. Someshwar Rao v. Samineni Nageshwar Rao, (2009) 14 SCC 677, Paras 11-15 (also referring to cheque bounce context in connected appeals).

G. Someshwar Rao Vs Samineni Nageshwar Rao and Another, Order date: 29 July 2009, Case Number: Criminal Appeals No. 1353 of 2009 with No. 1354 of 2009, Neutral Citation: (2009) 14 SCC 677, Name of court: Supreme Court of India, Name of Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Cyriac Joseph.

[Readers are advised not to treat this as substitute for legal advise as it may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation]  

[Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi]