Shree Chandrashekhar,J. - (1.) Aggrieved by order dated 02.07.2015 in Title Suit No.125 of 2013, the present writ petition has been filed.
(2.) The petitioner is the plaintiff in Title Suit No.125 of 2013. The suit was instituted for declaring the registered reconstituted Deed of Trust vide Schedule-C as null & void and inoperative and it does not create endowment in favour of defendant nos.1 to 7 and for a declaration that the defendants have not acquired any right, title and interest over the Schedule-A property by virtue of the said Deed of Trust. Prayer for an interim injunction and an order staying operation of the account vide ScheduleD have also been made in the suit. The plaint was presented on 17.12.2013 and in the pending suit application dated 19.03.2015 was filed seeking a direction upon the defendants to produce the original minutes register containing resolutions from 21.03.2004 to 09.09.2012. The application dated 19.03.2015 was objected by the defendants contending that some of the documents have been stolen on 15.02.2013 from the Trust office and in this regard, a theft report was made to the police on 16.02.2013. Responding to the objection raised by the defendants, the plaintiff filed another application on 06.05.2015 praying for permission to lead secondary evidence insofar as, the minutes of meeting between the period 21.03.2004 and 09.09.2012 are concerned. The said applications have been dismissed vide impugned order dated 02.07.2015.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that whether the documents produced vide application dated 19.03.2015 can be admitted in evidence or not is a question which can be decided only during the trial and at this stage, the trial court could not have rejected the prayer for leading secondary evidence.;