9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 608X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is directed against the order dated 1-12-1997 whereby the learned lower Court has permitted the plaintiff-non-petitioner to cross-examine DW 1 Amarjeet singh with reference to the copy of the assessment order for the year 1980-81 filed by the plaintiff under Section 65 of the Evidence Act. 2.1 have beared Mr. A.K. Acharya the learned counsel appearing fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in original. In the instant case, no notice was given to the witness to produce the document in original. Hence, the plaintiff was not entitled to produce the photostat copy of the alleged assessment order for the year 1980-81 and to confront it to the witness. 4. The learned counsel for the non-petitioner has supported the impugned order on the ground that the assessment order related to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocument in question must have been in possession of the witness because it related to him and, therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to produce the secondary evidence. However, under Section 66 of the Evidence Act, it is obligatory that secondary evidence of the contents of the documents referred to in Section 65 clause (a) shall not be given unless the party proposing to given such secondary evid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... committed illegality or material irregularity in exercise of its jurisdiction in according permission to the plaintiff to produce photostat copy of the assessment order of the year 1980-81. 7. In the result, I allow this revision petition and set aside the order dated 1-12-1997 passed by the learned Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division ) No. 2, Udaipur. The parties are left to bear their own c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
