JUDGMENT : AJAY MOHAN GOEL, J. 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed order dated 5.9.2017, passed by the Court of learned District Judge, Hamirpur in CMA No. 56/2017 in Civil Appeal No. 86 of 2015 titled as Shakti Chand vs. Saroop Singh, vide which an application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC by the petitioner, stands dismissed by the learned appellate Court. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the impugned order as well as application which was filed before learned appellate Court under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC. 3. Production of additional evidence in appellate Court in appeal is permissible under the provisions of Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC, inter-alia, provided that the party seeking to produce additional evidence establishes that notwithstanding the exercise of due diligence, such evidence was either not in its knowledge or despite exercise of due diligence, the same could not be produced by it at the time when the decree appealed against was passed. 4. The averments as were mentioned in the application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC which was filed before learned appellate Court read as under:- "Application U/s. 41 rule 27 of CPC read with section 151 CPC for granting permission to take on record the certified/attested copy by way of additional evidence of Jambandi for the years of 2011-12 and Family Partition statements (Khangi Taksim) dated 12-6-1991, due to the reasons assigned below. Sir, The applicant/appellant submits as under:- 1. That the above titled appeal is pending before this Hon'ble court and is fixed for today. (An affidavit is duly attested herewith) 2. That the documents captioned in the head note of the application were handed over to the advocate engaged in the lower but under some bona-fide mistake, he did not place it on the record and it remained with his brief. 3. That the applicant/appellant intends to produce on record the said documents, which would also be very helpful for this court to decide the case properly and effectively to impart justice to the parties. It is therefore prayed that the present application may kindly be allowed and the documents mentioned above may kindly be ordered to be taken on the record in the interest of justice." 5. It is therefore prayed that the present application may kindly be allowed and the documents mentioned above may kindly be ordered to be taken on the record in the interest of justice." 5. The application is as cryptic and vague as it could have been and there is not even a whisper therein as to why the documents which were intended to be placed on record by way of the application could not be produced earlier before the learned trial Court. The reason given that the documents stood handed over to the counsel engaged in the Lower Court but under some bonafide mistake, he could not place on record and it remained with his brief does not inspires confidence. There is no affidavit filed of the counsel to substantiate the contents made in the application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC. As this Court is satisfied that the application filed by the petitioner before appellate Court was not fulfilling the ingredients of Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure and as there is no perversity or jurisdictional error committed by learned appellate Court vide order which stands impugned by way of this petition, the same is dismissed being devoid of merit. Interim order stands vacated. Parties through their learned counsel are directed to appear before learned appellate Court on 13.5.2019.