Daljeet Singh And Others vs Balbir Singh And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 10259 P&H

CR-7739-2019 (O&M)                                                -1-

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH


                                                       CR-7739-2019 (O&M)
                                                  Date of decision: 31.08.2022

Daljeet Singh and others                                          ..Petitioners
                                    Versus

Balbir Singh and others                                          ..Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL Present: Mr.B.S.Bhalla, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. N.K.Manchanda, Advocate for respondent no.1.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J(Oral)

While assailing the correctness of an interlocutory order passed

by the trial court, permitting the plaintiffs to produce secondary evidence of

a settlement deed, the defendant no.1 has filed the present revision petition.

This Bench has heard the learned counsels representing the

parties at length and with their able assistance perused the paper book.

After noticing that a wrong practice has established in the

courts to make an application for permission to lead secondary evidence a

requisite, the Bombay High Court while deciding Civil Revision application

No.82 of 2016, decided on 10.11.2017, directed the trial courts to stop the

practice of requiring applications for permission to lead secondary evidence

as a mandate, particularly when it is not supported by any provision of law.

Thereafter, this court in Madan vs. Shankar and others (RSA-327-1989

decided on 01.11.2018) held that there is no provision for filing a mandatory

application for permission to lead the secondary evidence. In a recent

judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Dhanpat vs. Sheo Ram, 2020

1 of 2

CR-7739-2019 (O&M) -2-

SCC Online SC 606, a similar observation has been made.

Keeping in view the aforesaid position, the revision petition is

disposed of while directing the trial Court to permit the plaintiffs to lead

secondary evidence. After such the evidence has been led, the Court shall

examine, "As to whether such evidence is primary or secondary?" If it is

found that the evidence led is secondary, then the Court shall further

examine whether such evidence fulfills all the parameters laid under the

Indian Evidence Act, 1872, with regard to the admissibility of secondary

evidence.

Disposed of accordingly.

All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also

disposed of.

August 31, 2022                                       (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
nt                                                          JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned                 : Yes/No
Whether reportable                        : Yes/No




                                       2 of 2