IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.6775 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision : 19.11.2009. Harender Singh .....Petitioner versus Mahavir .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 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? --- ORDER Surya Kant, J. (Oral) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 12.10.2009 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Palwal, whereby an application moved by the petitioner-defendant to direct the respondent-plaintiff and one of the attesting witnesses, namely, Fateh Singh son of Balbir Singh to give their specimen voice for audio examination, has been dismissed. The plaintiff-respondent has filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 20.7.1998 against the defendant-petitioner. One Fateh Singh son of Balbir Singh is an attesting witness to the said agreement. C.R. No.6775 of 2009 (O&M) 2 After the respondent-plaintiff had led substantial part of his evidence, the petitioner-defendant moved an application for specimen voice recording of the attesting witness as the said witness is alleged to have admitted that the agreement to sell is a fake document. The aforesaid application has been dismissed by the trial Court, giving rise to this revision petition. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order. In my considered view, no case to interfere with the order under challenge is made out. Firstly, the evidentiary value of an audio recording is too poor to be relied upon and secondly, the petitioner- defendant has to lead positive evidence to prove that the alleged agreement to sell is a fake document or is not based up on any valid consideration. Dismissed. 19-11-2009 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE