S.S. Sodhi, J. - (1.) THE challenge in revision here is to the denial of Permission to lead secondary evidence of the agreement said to have been executed on May 15, 1971.
(2.) IT was the case of the Plaintiff that the original agreement had been given by him to his counsel, but when he went to him in the third week of October, 1983, it was discovered, during consultation, that the original agreement was missing. The photo -stat copies thereof were however, there on the file. Effort was then made to locate it, but they did not succeed. He there upon lodged a report at the police station on October 23, 1983. It was in the these circumstances that the Plaintiff sought to adduce secondary evidence of the agreement. The trial court clearly fell in error in disallowing the evidence merely on the ground that no mention of the loss of the original had been made by the Plaintiff either in plaint or in the replication. It is significant, in this behalf, to note that the loss of this document was also reported to the police as far back as October, 1983. These being the circumstances, the trial court clearly fell in error in refusing secondary evidence.
(3.) THE impugned order of the trial court is accordingly hereby set aside and the court is directed to permit secondary evidence on the agreement to be led. Costs of this petition shall be costs of the suit.;