R.L.ANAND, J. - (1.) THIS is a Civil Revision and has been directed against the order dated 8.10.1999, passed by Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Jalandhar, who, dismissed the application of the petitioner under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for secondary evidence.
(2.) SOME facts can be noticed in the following manner : Smt. Rattan Kaur claiming herself to be the legal heir of Darshan Singh, filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance alleging that Shri Amar Singh for himself and on behalf of his sons and wife had entered into an agreement of sale dated 29.6.1990 with regard to the property to be sold, mentioned in the agreement itself. The sale deed was to be executed on or before 29.6.1992. The defendant became dishonest. Hence the suit by the legal representative. The suit has been contested. The suit was instituted somewhere in the year 1992. When the suit was at the fag end, the plaintiff made an application praying that she may be allowed to lead secondary evidence with regard to the fact that Shri Amar Singh was holding a attorney on behalf of his wife and sons. This application was contested by the defendants-respondents and finally vide impugned order dated 8.10.1999, the application was dismissed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Jalandhar for the reasons given in the impugned order. Hence the present revision.
(3.) I have heard Shri O.P. Hoshiarpuri, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Shri R.C. Dogra, Sr. Counsel, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3 and with their assistance I have gone through the record of the case.;