SMT. SUDHA DEVI vs M.P. NARAYANAN & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that a plaintiff cannot obtain a decree based solely on the evidence presented in the suit, especially in the absence of a defense, as reliable evidence is essential for an ex-parte decree. The Court emphasized that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to support the claim that the third defendant was inducted into the property after the decree. It ruled that affidavits do not constitute evidence under Section 3 of the Evidence Act unless permitted by the court, and thus the plaintiff could not fill evidentiary gaps at the Supreme Court stage. The Court remanded the suit for retrial, setting aside the High Court's judgment.