In order to admit secondary evidence of a document, the party seeking to admit the evidence must lay a proper foundation by showing that the original document is unavailable and that the secondary evidence is the best available evidence of the contents of the original document.

ORDER :

1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Article 227 of Constitution of India against the orders passed by learned II Additional District Judge, Guntur in I.A.No.1487 of 2015 in O.S.No.161 of 2015 wherein and whereby learned trial Judge dismissed petition filed by the petitioner to receive Photostat copy of partition list dated 01.09.1985 as secondary evidence.

2. Before the trial Court, petitioner filed petition under Section 65 of Indian Evidence Act stating that he filed suit against the respondent seeking declaration and permanent injunction. The revision petitioner submits that himself, respondent and one Mr.Ravindra Reddy are real brothers and he acquired the plaint schedule property by way of partition. It is the contention of petitioner that on 01.09.1985 a partition list was prepared among himself and his brothers and Photostat copy of the said partition list furnished to him and original copy is kept with his brother Mr.N.Ravindra Reddy. He submits that at the time of filing of suit, he filed Photostat copy of partition list into the Court and he intended to mark the said original partition list dated 01.09.1985 and filed petition in I.A.No.610 of 2013 to summon his brother Mr.N.Ravindra Reddy, who is custodian of original partition list and cause production of the said document. The petitioner also stated that on receiving summons from the Court his brother Ravindra Reddy attended before the Court on 09.07.2015 and deposed that original partition list is not available with him due to that original partition list could not be produced, which could not be traced. Therefore, petitioner/plaintiff filed petition to mark Photostat copy of partition list, dated 01.09.1985 as secondary evidence on his behalf. For which respondent/defendant filed counter before trial Court denying averments in the affidavit of the petitioner. It is the contention of the respondent that no partition of the properties took place in between themselves and said partition list dated 01.09.1985 is not at all in existence, which is created by the petitioner for the purpose of filing of the suit. It is also the contention of the respondent that without proof of existence of original partition list dated 01.09.1985 the question of filing Photostat copy does not arise. He also alleged that petitioner did not assign any valid reasons to mark Photostat copy of partition list dated 01.09.1985 as secondary evidence. He prays to dismiss the petition.

3. After hearing both sides, learned trial Judge dismissed petition filed by the petitioner by observing that contents of the document shows that it is a partition deed, which requires stamp duty as well as registration as original itself is not registered and no stamp duty is paid, which cannot be received as a secondary evidence.

4. Aggrieved by the orders passed by learned trial Judge, petitioner filed present revision petition stating that orders of trial Court are contrary to law weight of evidence and probabilities of the case. He submits that trial Court ought to have seen that he has assigned reasons for adducing secondary evidence and an opportunity ought to have given to him to file Photostat copy of partition list. It is the contention of the revision petitioner that mere marking of the document is not enough which veracity or correctness shall be examined by the Court after considering the overall evidence and also corroborating evidence available on record, which failed to consider by the trial Court. He further submits that he complied the requirements for adducing secondary evidence. He prays to allow the civil revision petition and permit him to mark Photostat copy of partition list dated 01.09.1985 as secondary evidence.

5. I have heard both sides.

6. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that Photostat copy of partition list dated 01.09.1985 can be received in evidence subject to proof and relevancy, which can be decided at the time