IMMANENI PANDURANGA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition is filed by the Plaintiff challenging the order of the learned District Munsif, Ibrahimpatnam rejecting the request of the petitioner/plaintiff to permit him to file the photostat copy of the agreement of sale as secondary evidence. Normally no doubt photostat copy cannot be admitted in evidence. But in this case the original agreement of sale was sent by the court to the Sub-Registrar, Ibrahimpatnam to find out the valuation of the suit property and to impound the document. The Sub-Registrar, after issuing so many reminders, reported to the Court that the document was lost.

( 2 ) THEREUPON the plaintiff filed I. A. No. 94/89 requesting the Court to permit him to file the photostat copy of the agreement of sale as secondary evidence. Sec. 65 (c) of the Indian Evidence Act empowers a party to let in secondary evidence:"when the original has been destroyed or lost or when the party offering evidence of its contents cannot for any other reason not arising from his own default or neglect, produce it in reasonable time. "in this case there is no do,ubt that the original document was filed by the party into the Court. The Court in i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document