RAJ KUMAR Vs. NIRMAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-defendant has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 05.11.2014 (Annexure P-5) passed by the trial Court vide which the application for leading secondary evidence to prove agreement to sell was allowed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently, contended that in the absence of proof of existence of the original document its condition and loss, the secondary evidence could not be permitted unless it is covered under any of the clauses of Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 65 says that secondary evidence may be given of the existence, condition or contents of a document in the following cases:-

(3.) Plaintiff-respondents no. 1 and 2 filed a suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 05.07.2006 with consequential relief. The agreement to sell was allegedly executed by Sish Ram for a consideration of Rs. 1,22,50,000/- per acre and the plaintiffs are stated to have paid Rs. 15 lacs in the shape of two cheques as described in the plaint and also an amount of Rs. 6 lacs by cash. It was stated that Sish Ram was to complete certain formalities under the terms of agreement. Sish Ram died on 07.12.2008 and defendants in the suit including the petitioner are the heirs of Sish Ram.