RAJASTHAN GOLDEN TRANSPORT COMPANY Vs. LRS OF AMRITLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is directed against the order dated 1-12-1997 whereby the learned lower Court has permitted the plaintiff-non-petitioner to cross-examine DW 1 Amarjeetsingh with reference to the copy of the assessment order for the year 1980-81 filed by the plaintiff under Section 65 of the Evidence Act.

(2.) I have heared Mr. A.K. Acharya the learned counsel appearing for the defendant-petitioner and Mr. Bhupendra Bhatnagar, the learned counsel for the plaintiff-non-petitioner.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 1-12-1997 on the ground that the learned lower court has not stated a single word about the fact as to whether the plaintiff-non-petitioner was entitled to produce the secondary evidence. Section 65 of the Evidence Act contains the cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given. Looking to the nature of the document, it could have been presumed that the original was with the witness but before according permission to lead secondary evidence, a notice under Section 65 of the Evidence Act ought to have been given to the witness requiring the production of the document in original. In the instant case, no notice was given to the witness to produce the document in original. Hence, the plaintiff was not entitled to produce the photostat copy of the alleged assessment order for the year 1980-81 and to confront it to the witness.