CMPMO 875 of 2008 6.4.2009 Present: Shri B.M. Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioner Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. A.G. for the respondent. CMPMO No. 875 of 2008 Heard. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner who submits that the learned Appellate Court was in error in allowing the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure which should have been dealt and disposed of alongwith main appeal. His submission is that the learned Appellate Court has acted contrary to law by allowing the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code. Without going into this controversy, it will be open to the petitioner herein to challenge the decree in appeal on all grounds including the ground that the learned Court had no jurisdiction to dispose of/allow the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure independently of the appeal. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also urges that on merits also the application for leading additional evidence cannot be allowed. This ground shall also be open to the petitioner herein to be urged in appeal, if any, preferred by him. Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. All interim applications disposed of. April 6, 2009(ms) (Dev Darshan Sud), J.