LAWS(HPH)-2018-5-214

ALPAR APPLIANCES Vs. LEELA DUTT

Decided On May 31, 2018
Alpar Appliances Appellant
V/S
Leela Dutt Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) During the pendency of the plaintiff's suit, for rendition of a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction, for, restraining the defendant, from, causing interference, damage and encroachment, vis-a-vis, the suit khasra numbers, an application, cast under the provisions of Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, was, instituted before the learned trial Court, by the defendant/applicant/petitioner herein, wherein, it sought leave of the Court, to, tender into evidence, a, photo copy of the general power of attorney, as, bestowed by the applicant, upon one Krishan Kumar, on the ground of original thereof, being not traceable, despite, best apt endeavours, hence, made by the applicant, for, locating it.

(2.) The application was contested, by the plaintiff/respondent herein. The contest was anvilled, upon, the factum, of, prior thereto, the conditions, occurring, in the provisions, of Section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, requiring theirs being meted the completest satisfaction, and, the application being moved with an ulterior motive, merely, for prolonging or protracting the trial of the suit.

(3.) The learned trial Court, upon, considering the respective contentions, of the parties, declined, the apposite leave, to the applicant/petitioner herein, (i) the reason which stood assigned by the learned trial Court, was, anvilled, upon, want of lodging of FIR, and, rapat by the applicant/petitioner herein, for, hence the applicant prima facie establishing qua it being lost or being untraceable, (ii) thereupon, it concluded, of, with the mandate, of apposite clause (3) of Section 65, of the Indian Evidence Act, rather foisting, an imperative condition qua emanations, of, prima facie, proof qua the original rather being lost or destroyed, condition whereof, rather remaining not accomplished to the completest, hence, it declined, the apposite leave to the applicant/petitioner herein. The petitioner herein/defendant being aggrieved therefrom, hence, has instituted the instant petition, before this Court.