Civil Revision No.2873 of 2008 : 1 :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

Civil Revision No.2873 of 2008

Date of Decision: May 19, 2008

Parminder Singh & Company, BXX-2970, Gurdev Nagar (Back side

Malhar Theatre), Ludhiana.

...Petitioner

VERSUS

Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Ludhiana & others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the

judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present:

Mr.Pawan Kumar, Advocate and

Mr.Swapan Shorey, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

*****

RANJIT SINGH, J.

Prayer of respondent No.3 for leading secondary

evidence in regard to cheques bearing No.0168212 and 0168213

drawn on Bank of Baroda, Block Tower, Ludhiana stands allowed.

Feeling aggrieved against the same, the petitioner has filed the

present revision petition to impugn the said order.

Respondent-Improvement

Trust

had

issued

Civil Revision No.2873 of 2008 : 2 :

advertisement for auction of one hotel site, situated in the Model

Town Extension Scheme, Ludhiana., The auction was initially fixed

on 20.1.1992, but was conducted on 25.2.1992. The hotel site was

auctioned for Rs.39, 94,320/-. The successful bidder had deposited

25% of the bit amount. The dispute has now arisen between the

petitioner and respondent No.3, who are Parminder Singh and

Company and Shri Parminder Singh son of Jagdish Singh. It is

claimed by plaintiff Jasbir Singh that he is proprietor of M/s

Parminder Singh & Company and his bid was accepted in the said

auction. He further says that the money was deposited by him. When

respondents No.1 and 2 were intended to cancel the said auction, he

filed the instant suit. Respondent No.3, however, claims that he was

successful in the bid and he had deposited the entire amount. He

has also filed a separate suit for seeking declaration that he is the

real purchaser of the plot and has impleaded the plaintiff in the

present suit as one of the defendants. Both the suits were

consolidated and are being tried.

It is noticed that amount of Rs.four lacs was deposited by

the successful bidder vide receipt No.78620 dated 25.2.1992.

Otherwise, it is stated that total amount of Rs.six lacs was deposited

with Ludhiana Improvement Trust vide draft No.551927 dated

25.2.1992 drawn on Bank of Baroda against receipt No.78559 dated

25.2.1992. Both the plaintiffs and respondents are alleging that they

had deposited the said amount. Respondent No.3, however, pleads

that the Bankers cheque/draft No.551927 dated 25.2.1992 was got

issued from the Bank account of Maan Singh & Company against

Civil Revision No.2873 of 2008 : 3 :

cheque No.0168212 dated 25.2.1992 issued by Shri J.S.Garcha

father of the defendant on behalf of M/s Maan Singh & Company.

Application accordingly was filed for grant of permission to prove the

cheques in question by way of secondary evidence. It is revealed in

the application that record of the bank relating to the withdrawal of

the amount of Rs.four lacs by Maan Singh & Company was

summoned from the Bank. It is then disclosed that the record relating

to the cheques in question was destroyed by the Bank as per the

guidelines and, thus, this record is not available. Original cheques

accordingly cannot be produced. The plaintiff has obtained the

copies of the cheques as per the provisions of the Banker Books

Evidence Act, which has already been placed on record as marks

DX2 and DX3. It is also stated that father of the defendant-applicant

had made an endorsement on the back of cheque No.0168212

requesting the Bank to issue pay order in the name of Chairman,

Improvement Trust, Ludhiana. Since the original record has been

destroyed, permission is sought to prove the said cer