Rupinder Kaur vs Sarjiwan Kumar and Others

Inderjit Singh, J.

CM No. 17353-CII of 2014:

CM is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Documents annexed with the CM are taken on record.

CR. No. 3486 of 2014:

Rupinder Kaur-petitioner/plaintiff has filed this civil revision petition against Sarji-wan Kumar etc.-respondents under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 23.4.2014 (Annexure-P. 6) vide which the application filed by respondent No. 2 under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act for proving the alleged rent note dated 19.10.2000 by way of secondary evidence has been illegally allowed.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

From the record, I find that the learned Rent Controller, Khanna vide order dated 23.4.2014 allowed the secondary evidence qua rent note in question. The application has been moved for proving rent note dated 19.10.2000 by way of secondary evidence. This application was moved on the ground that alleged rent note dated 19.10.2000 is forged and fabricated document. In civil suit-bearing No. 293 of 28.9.2001 filed by the petitioner, the alleged rent note was not accepted by the Court. The alleged rent note does not bear signatures of the petitioner and the present application has been filed just to create false evidence. The learned Rent Controller stated that the Court in the earlier judgment dated 30.11.2011 has discarded the alleged rent note and the suit of the petitioner was decreed but the respondents after the dismissal of the appeal have filed RSA before the High Court, which is still pending and that judgment has not become final.

At the time of arguments before this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that as all the averments of the rent note have been mentioned in the register of Deed Writer, therefore, this Deed Writer''s register is to be taken as primary evidence and there is no necessity to prove the photo copy of the rent note by leading secondary evidence.

On this argument, I find that Deed Writer''s register entry cannot be held as a rent note. It is only corroborative piece of evidence to prove the execution of the rent note. The photo copy of the rent note can be proved by way of leading secondary evidence. If secondary evidence is not allowed, then the applicant-respondents will suffer loss. It is no where argued that the loss of this document has not been proved nor there is any argument that this document does not exist.

As regards the evidentiary value of this rent note, that is to be seen by the Court on the basis of the evidence produced before it. At this stage, nothing can be said whether this is validly executed document or is a forged document or obtained by fraud etc. Therefore, the impugned order dated 23.4.2014 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Khanna is correct and as per law and does not require any interference from this Court. Finding no merit in this civil revision petition, the same is dismissed.