NIRVAIL SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE contour of the facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant revision petition and emanating from the record, is that initially, petitioners -plaintiffs Nirvail Singh and Sucha Singh sons of Shangara Singh (for brevity "the plaintiffs") have instituted the civil suit for a decree of declaration and permanent injunction, restraining the Punjab State Electricity Board and its officers respondents -defendants No. 1 to 3 from disconnecting the tubewell connection and further restraining the private respondents -defendant Nos. 4 to 9 (for short "the contesting defendants") from transferring the electric connection in dispute to any other person in any manner. The defendants contested the suit, filed the written statement, stoutly denied all the allegations confined in the plaint and prayed for dismissal of suit. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiffs moved an application (Annexure P1) u/s. 65 of the Indian Evidence Act (hereinafter to he referred as "the Act") for permission to lead secondary evidence to prove the copy of deed of agreement/family settlement dated 18.4.1995. The contesting defendants No. 4 to 8 refuted the prayer of plaintiffs, filed the reply (Annexure P2), strongly denied all the allegations contained in the application and prayed for its dismissal.

(2.) THE trial Court dismissed the application of plaintiffs for permission to lead secondary evidence, by virtue of impugned order dated 18.7.2012 (Annexure P3).

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after deep consideration over the entire matter, to my mind, the instant petition deserves to be partly accepted in this context.