IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4869 OF 2007 Between : Hussain Mohiuddin and another .... PETITIONERS A N D The District Collector, and others. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 4869 OF 2007 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order, dated 06.09.2007 in I.A. No. 1891 of 2007 in O.S. No.478 of 1990, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad, whereunder and whereby, the application filed to receive the certified copies of documents which were filed in xerox copies earlier, as additional documents as per list by condoning the delay, was dismissed. 2. The suit was filed for declaration of title and possession in respect of suit property and also permanent injunction restraining the respondents / defendants from assigning or recording the names of other persons and also for correction of the revenue records. The original suit was decreed by the trial court and the respondents / defendants preferred an appeal A.S. No.1911 of 2001, and the same was allowed remanding the matter to trial court. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that certain documents which are Xerox copies were filed at the time of filing of the suit, but the originals thereof have been misplaced, and could not be traced and so the same have to be replaced with certified copies; that in addition to the above, certain representations given to the respondents have to be marked. 4. There cannot be any dispute that under Sec.65 of Evidence Act 1872, secondary evidence may be given of the existence, condition or contents of a document in case the original document has been destroyed or lost. It is not in dispute that the xerox copies of documents were filed along with the plaint. Proper explanation was given that during pendency of case, the original documents were misplaced and not traced later. Now the petitioner obtained certified copies of those documents recently. Where the original has been misplaced and a party has made a diligent search for it and exhausted all the sources and means available for its production, secondary evidence is admissible. But secondary evidence is not to be admitted mechanically or as a matter of course. Sufficient reason must be shown for non-production of the original document. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. However, the respondents can raise objections, if any, for marking of those documents. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU. J APRIL 21, 2010. YVL THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2100 OF 2009 DATED 21.04.2010