ASHOK KUMAR Vs. ANIL KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the constitution of India for setting aside the orders dated 5th March, 2004, 31st May, 2004 and 20th September, 2004 passed by the Additional District judge, Delhi. By virtue of the said orders, the petitioner/defendant's application for leading secondary evidence under Section 65 of the Indian evidence Act, 1872 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') was dismissed and subsequently, the defendant's evidence was closed and the matter was listed for final arguments.

(2.) THE trial court had rejected the petitioner's application under Section 65 of the Act on the ground that the petitioner/defendant deliberately did not file the originals of the documents in the suit filed by the petitioner despite being given several opportunities. The trial court was further of the view that the petitioner's case was not covered under Clause (c) of Section 65 of the Act. The relevant portion of the impugned order dated 15th March, 2004 is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:-

(3.) MR. Rawal, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner/defendant's case was that the respondent/plaintiff had sold the flat in question to the petitioner/defendant. He stated that to effectuate the sale, the respondent/plaintiff had executed the following documents:-"1. Agreement to sell dated 9. 4. 1995 2. General. Power of Attorney dated 8. 5. 1995. 3. Indemnity Bond dated 8. 5. 1995.