Bal Krishan @ Rana And Anr vs Ashok Kumar And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 6235 P&H

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

202
                                            C.R.No.6257 of 2018(O&M)
                                            Date of decision: 06.07.2022

Bal Krishan @ Rana and another                                ...Petitioners

                                     Versus
Ashok Kumar and another                                      ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present: Mr. R.S.Dadwal, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Sukhjit Singh, Advocate, for respondent no.1 and 2.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J (Oral)

The petitioners herein are the defendants in a suit for separate

possession by way of partition of the property filed by the plaintiffs

(respondents).

The plaintiffs claim the property to be joint, whereas, the

defendants claim that the property has already been partitioned vide a deed

dated 28.03.1971.

During the pendency of the suit, the defendants filed an

application for directing the plaintiffs to produce the original of the aforesaid

deed of partition or in the alternative, permit them to lead secondary

evidence. The plaintiffs took a stand that no such document ever existed and

the same is not in their possession.

Now the only question is as to whether the prior permission of

the court is required to give secondary evidence of the document which is a

photocopy of the original in the present case?

The Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court and the

Bombay High Court have repeatedly, promoted the view that no such prior

permission is required. Reference in this regard can be placed upon the

1 of 2

judgment passed in Vinod Kumar vs. Satbir Singh(Civil Revision No.2575

of 2020, decided on 03.03.2021).

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the revision petition is

disposed of .

The petitioners shall be permitted to lead evidence and the

Court, after appreciating the evidence, shall decide upon the question of its

admissibility as secondary evidence while deciding the suit.

All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also

disposed of.

July 06, 2022                                         (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
nt                                                          JUDGE

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




                                       2 of 2