CMPMO No.49 of 2008 20.3.2008 Present: Mr.Bimal Gupta, counsel for the petitioner. This petition has been filed against the order dated 18.12.2007 passed by Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Sirmour at Nahan in C.S. No.56/1 of 2005/240/6 of 2007 whereby he has rejected the application of the petitioner (plaintiff) filed under Order 7 Rule 14 CPC for placing on record the photo copy of the alleged Will dated 8.6.1965. The plaintiff claims to have purchased this land from Sh.Ram Chander who according to the plaintiff, had inherited the land through Will dated 8.6.1965 from the original owner Sh.Bishamber. The Will was disputed by the defendant. An issue in this behalf was also framed. Onus of this issue was on the plaintiff. After the plaintiff and defendant had led evidence this application was filed. This application, in my opinion, was filed at a very highly belated stage. I am not going to the question whether the photo copy of the Will could have been proved or not but the fact remains that the application was only filed under Order 7 Rule 14 CPC and the only prayer made in the application is that the photo copy of the Will dated 8.6.1965 be allowed to be produced on record. There is not even a prayer in the application that the plaintiff may be permitted to prove this Will. Even otherwise, photo copy of the Will being secondary evidence cannot be permitted to be placed on record till the plaintiff seeks permission of the Court to lead secondary evidence. This application was therefore totally misconceived and the order of the learned trial Court is upheld. I have been told that the case is fixed for arguments. It is made clear that the plaintiff, if the case is decided against him, may move appropriate application before the appellate Court for leading additional evidence who shall consider the same in accordance with law. The Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. March 20, 2008. (Deepak Gupta), PV Judge