The legal document discusses the admissibility of a photocopy of an agreement of sale in a civil case. The court emphasized that objections to the receipt of such evidence must be raised at the appropriate stage and must be decided before the document is marked as an exhibit. In this case, the petitioner had raised objections to the admissibility of the photocopy, but the court below admitted it without resolving these objections, which was a procedural error.

The court clarified that under the relevant procedural rules, objections regarding the relevance or admissibility of documents should be considered and decided prior to marking the document as evidence. Since the objections were not addressed before the document was admitted, the subsequent marking and reliance on the photocopy were improper.

Furthermore, the court highlighted that the objections to the document's admissibility, especially when the authenticity or existence of the original is disputed, need to be established at the time of evidence submission. Failing to do so and proceeding to admit the photocopy without a proper ruling on the objections constitutes a breach of procedural fairness.

Based on these principles, the court found that the lower court erred in admitting the photocopy of the agreement of sale as evidence without first deciding on the objections raised by the petitioner. Consequently, the order permitting the photocopy to be received as evidence was set aside, and any evidence recorded after the improper admission was to be excluded. The evidence must be re-recorded afresh, excluding the improperly admitted document.