1. This revision petition filed under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity, the Code) seeks to challenge the order dated 13-1-1999 declining the application of the plaintiff-petitioner for adducing additional evidence. In the additional evidence the plaintiff-petitioner sought permission to lead secondary evidence of a document dated 31-12-1991 alleging that the original of the family arrangement witnessed in the writing was in possession of defendant-respondent No. 1. The application of the plaintiff-petitioner has been dismissed on the principal ground that the photostat copy of writing dated 31-12-1991, which is a family settlement, witnessed between the parties, it has been expressly recorded that consideration from one party to another has passed and, therefore, it required (sic) 1908 (for brevity, the Act). The Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mohindergarh while dismissing the application has recorded the following order : "Ld. counsel for the plaintiff has argued that writing was family partition, hence secondary evidence of the same should be allowed. Ld. counsel for the plaintiff has relied upon authority in case Mukhtiar Singh v. Bant Singh, (1