Is it true that 'application or defense' and the EVIDENCE used to expose the act of the other party who was slapped with a milder decree/order (or rather got away with very negligible repremand and hence almost peanuts to decree holder) by cheating and hiding the complete picture (which was within his knowledge) is called REBUTTAL EVIDENCE?
OR
What is the nomenclature used for the Evidence which is produced afterwards i.e. after the order passed, so as to expose the 'fraud' by other party during the earlier proceedings?
And what rules of time limitation or due diligence are required?
Please give me a answer and insight. Thanks.
My question is that :- 'Fraud always gets exposed after it is committed' then why the victim is cross questioned on the timing of producing the evidecen pertaining to that'?
Please give your expert suggestions and answer
Thanking you all
