S.S. BYAS, J.—This is a plaintiffs revision against an order of the Addl. District Judge, Baran dated 4. 8. 1984 by which the defendants application under Section 65 of the Evidence Act was allowed and he was permitted to adduce secondary evidence to prove a mortgage.

2. Stated in short, the relevant facts are that the plaintiff instituted a suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale pertaining to Khasra No. 123 comprising an area of 16.3 bighas. It was alleged that on 24. 5. 1980 the defendant entered into agreement with him to sell his aforesaid agriculture land to the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 17,000/-. A sum of Rs. 15,201/- was paid by the plaintiff to the defendant in cash on that every day and the remaining amount of Rs. 1,799/. was agreed to be paid at the time of the registration of the sale deed. The defendant did not turn up for execution of the sale deed. The plaintiff, therefore, filed the suit for the specific performance of the agreement of sale in the court of the Addl. District Judge, Baran. The suit was resisted by the defendant. He denied to have made any agreement of sale in favour of the plaintiff. He came out altogether with another story and alleged

Click Here to Read the rest of this document