Civil Revision No.1714 of 2009 [1 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB &
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
...
Civil Revision No.1714 of 2009
Decided on : March 26, 2009
Lachhman Singh and others
… Petitioners
VERSUS
Ujjagar Singh and others
… Respondents
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL
Present: Mr.Deepak Aggarwal,
Advocate for the petitioners.
A.N.JINDAL, J.-
Heard.
The Trial Court has passed the impugned order dated
20.1.2009 (Annexure P-6), with a condition that the secondary evidence
of the plaintiffs (respondents herein) will be subject to the proof of
existence of original, loss thereof and further subject to admissibility.
Counsel for the defendants – petitioners has cited State of
Rajasthan and others vs. Khemraj and others, AIR 2000 SC 1759,
in order to contend that the application should contain full details and
also must be supported by an affidavit, to bring it within the purview of
the provisions of Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
However, the Apex Court did not make it a statutory requirement,
Civil Revision No.1714 of 2009 [2 ]
therefore, non-filing of the affidavit could be a curable defect and does
not vitiate the result of the application. Such defect could be cured and
the court could require the party to file an affidavit in support of the
documents, at any stage.
However, since the application for secondary evidence does
not decide the rights of the parties and moreover, it has been allowed,
subject to the admissibility of the document and proof of existence of its
original, therefore, the present revision is hardly maintainable.
Dismissed.
March 26, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE