RAMESH CHAND SHARMA MAJOR Vs. VIPIN MODI MAJOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-defendant (hereafter 'the defendant') is aggrieved of the order dated 23-4-2018 passed by Additional Civil Judge Keshavraipatan, District Bundi in suit No. 55/2013 allowing the respondent-plaintiff's (hereafter 'the plaintiff') application under Section 65 of the Evidence Act for taking on record the copy of the notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1872 (hereafter 'the Act of 1872') as secondary evidence.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed an application under Section 65 of the Evidence Act for taking as secondary evidence the copy of the notice under Section 106 of the Act of 1872 sent to the defendant by registered post, which was received by him and acknowledgment of receipt signed already placed on record. It was submitted that thus the original of the notice in issue was evidently with the defendant and not in the plaintiff's possession and hence secondary evidence in regard thereto be allowed.

(3.) The defendant opposed the application on the ground that as there was no occasion to compare the copy of the notice with the original, it was not admissible in evidence and the same could not be taken on record as secondary evidence. The defendant denied having received any notice under Section 106 of the Act of 1872 allegedly sent by registered post or even signing the acknowledgment receipt in regard thereto. Reliance was placed on the judgment in the case of Smt. J. Yashoda v. Smt. K. Shobha Rani [2007(2) WLC (SC) Civil 253].