JOGINDER SINGH Vs. MAKHAN SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner/Plaintiff No.2 is only aggrieved of the impugned order dated 28.09.2016, whereby, an application at the instance of the plaintiff under Sections 65 and 66 of Indian Evidence Act, has been dismissed and not against the order dated 28.09.2016, dismissing the application of defendant No.1.

(2.) Mr. Rajesh Bhatheja, learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff No.2 submits that suit of the petitioner/plaintiff is based upon the following relief:-

(3.) There was a categoric pleading in paragraph 2 of the plaint that original adoption deed is not in possession of the plaintiff but in possession of defendants No.2 and 3, who have allegedly taken the same, though it is in the possession of defendant No.1 also. Defendant No.1 had also moved similar application but the same has been dismissed by taking into consideration the reply of defendants No.2 and 3. He submits that since the suit is based upon the foundation of adoption deed, which is a photocopy, though at least, liberty should have been granted to prove its existence and loss, only then the Court should have considered for permitting the petitioner to lead evidence by way of secondary evidence or not.