MAKHANLAL Vs. BALARAM AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution the petitioner has approached this court challenging the order of the trial court dated 26/2/2016 whereby the petitioner's application u/S.65 and 66 of the Evidence Act has been rejected.

(2.) The brief facts are that the petitioner has filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction with a prayer to declare the sale deed dated 20th June, 2011 as null and void and deliver the possession of the suit property. Pending the suit petitioner had earlier filed an application u/S.65 of the Evidence Act which was rejected by the trial court by order dated 30th September, 2015 on the technical ground of non service of notice to produce the document in terms of Sec.66. This Court by order dated 19/10/2015 passed in WP No.7294/2015 had set aside the order of the trial court with a direction to the trial court to reconsider the petitioner's prayer in accordance with law. The petitioner thereafter had filed the fresh application u/Ss.65 and 66 of the Evidence Act which has been rejected by the trial court by the impugned order.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner has produced photocopy of the lease agreement and the trial court has committed an error of law in refusing the petitioner's prayer to accept it as secondary evidence.