Civil Revision No.1714 of 2009 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Civil Revision No.1714 of 2009 Decided on : March 26, 2009 Lachhman Singh and others ... Petitioners VERSUS Ujjagar Singh and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioners. A.N.JINDAL, J.- Heard. The Trial Court has passed the impugned order dated 20.1.2009 (Annexure P-6), with a condition that the secondary evidence of the plaintiffs (respondents herein) will be subject to the proof of existence of original, loss thereof and further subject to admissibility. Counsel for the defendants - petitioners has cited State of Rajasthan and others vs. Khemraj and others, AIR 2000 SC 1759, in order to contend that the application should contain full details and also must be supported by an affidavit, to bring it within the purview of the provisions of Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. However, the Apex Court did not make it a statutory requirement, Civil Revision No.1714 of 2009 [ 2 ] therefore, non-filing of the affidavit could be a curable defect and does not vitiate the result of the application. Such defect could be cured and the court could require the party to file an affidavit in support of the documents, at any stage. However, since the application for secondary evidence does not decide the rights of the parties and moreover, it has been allowed, subject to the admissibility of the document and proof of existence of its original, therefore, the present revision is hardly maintainable. Dismissed. March 26, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE