MANA RAM Vs. LRS OF LATE HARI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition is directed against the order dated 8.4.2013 passed by the learned Addl. Dist. Judge No. 1, Sri Ganganagar Civil Suit No. 88/2007 whereby the application filed by the plaintiff petition under Section 65 of the Evidence Act for taking the copy of the alleged agreement dated 2.11.1999 on record was rejected.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court was not justified in going into the correctness of the document at the stage when the application under Section 65 of the Evidence Act was being considered. Thus, he urges that the impugned order is absolutely illegal and perverse and thus should be quashed.

(3.) Per contra Mr. Kotwani, learned Counsel for the respondent submitted the Trial Court whilst considering the application under Section 65 of the Evidence Act has to be satisfied about the genuineness of the document and thereafter only the document can be permitted to be tendered as secondary evidence. He relies on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Yashoda v. Smt. K Shobharani reported in 2007(2) WLC 253 and Hariom Agarwal v. Prakash Chand Malviya reported in AIR 2008 SC 166.