IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.3202 of 2009 Date of decision 28.5.2009. Ram Singh ...... Petitioner. versus Mohinder Singh ...... Respondent. Present : Mr. S.K.Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner. L.N.MITTAL,J.(Oral) This is revision petition by defendant impugning order dated 29.4.2009 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Civil Judge(Junior Division), Rohtak whereby application moved by the defendant-petitioner for permission to lead secondary evidence of exchange deed dated 22.2.1993 has been dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that neither the plaintiff- respondent nor the defendant-petitioner has referred to the alleged exchange deed in their pleadings. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not controvert this factual position. In view thereof, the petitioner cannot be permitted to lead even primary evidence, leave aside secondary evidence, of the alleged exchange deed when the same has not been pleaded by the defendant-petitioner because evidence beyond pleadings cannot be permitted to be led and cannot be looked into. Civil Revision No.3202 of 2009 /2/ In view of the aforesaid, there is no merit in the instant revision petition, which is accordingly dismissed in limine. ( L.N.MITTAL ) JUDGE May 28, 2009 sv