Spoliation of evidence and denial of existence of docs etc (after demanded by plaintiff thru 'notice to submit douments/facts') is construed as 'suppression of facts and evidence'
But......................
Some evidence withheld by the defendent although pleaded the facts (and facts not proved during the trial owing to 'no-proofs'), it resulted in a decree in favour of plaintiff,
But wherein unfortunately extraneous argument by plaintiff's side made additional disclosures during arguments and that has appeared in text of the Order.
Now defendent quickly moved 'revision' of the same, pleaded to file new evidence, using the evidence (probably known to them but not furnished at the time of trial) witheld by them (and has also got injuction/stay on the operation is granted suo moto).
Can plaintiff object to it over defendent's intensional neglegence of due diligence?
Is there any standard of due diligence?
Defendent has furnished it as 'rebuttal evidence' as well as 'change of circumstances' ?
Please give citations 'pro due diligence' and against 'witholding of evidence' (Is it related to 'corum nobis'? Does that apply to civil suits?)
How to counter such move of defendent, and how to nullify their evidence?
Can plaintiff ask for costs for this harrassement and delaying tactics?
