Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2021) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 16537 = 2022(1) L.A.R. 131
Decided on: 24.11.2021
Present:
Mr. Manvinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Constitution of India, Article 227 -- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 63, 65 – Secondary evidence – Revisional jurisdiction -- Trial Court, keeping in view the facts of the case permitted the plaintiffs to lead secondary evidence in order to prove the alleged first rent note -- Such permission is always granted subject to the existence and proof of the document -- Trial Court has only granted permission to lead secondary evidence – Court found it not appropriate to interfere in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India -- Petition dismissed.
(Para 1, 2)
***
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. –
1. The trial Court, keeping in view the facts of the present case, has permitted the plaintiffs to lead secondary evidence in order to prove the alleged first rent note dated 13.11.1970. Such permission is always granted subject to the existence and proof of the document. The trial Court has only granted permission to lead secondary evidence.
2. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this Bench does not find it appropriate to interfere in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the present revision petition is dismissed.
3. The miscellaneous application(s) pending, if any, shall stand disposed of.
Petition dismissed.
********