Mr. K. Kannan, J.: (Oral) - The revision petition is against a rejection of a plea to tender secondary evidence of a Will dated 04.02.1999 said to be in the custody of the 5th defendant-Harbhajan Singh. The plaintiff had filed copy of the Will for acceptance and pleaded that his inability to secure the original was on account of the refusal of the 5th defendant to produce the document in spite of an application moved in that regard.

2. The court went into an elaborate discussion of how the contention that the original was lost could not be true and referred to a so-called artificiality of the contentions that the original Will was in the hands of the 5th defendant. In the manner of rejecting the application, the court was literally giving an elaborate discourse of how the Will could not be true.

3. The Judge has done a gross injustice by pronouncing about what he thought was unnatural and how the copy of the Will could not be directed to be produced even before allowing for a party to give evidence of the circumstances under which the Will was said to have been written. It is absolutely essential that a Presiding Officer keeps himself abreast of law, for, it is his grasp of