IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.3677 of 2008 Date of decision : 14.1.2009 Kanwar Pal .....Petitioner Versus Raj Pal ...Respondent **** CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. Vishal Dhwan, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent despite service. S. D. ANAND, J. The plea raised by the petitioner for obtaining leave of the Court to adduce secondary evidence was declined by the learned Trial court by observing that the allowance thereof would be an exercise in futility because the petitioner cannot be absolved from liability unless if he is able to prove that the sale of offending vehicle by him to another had been intimated to the registering authority. The petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Tribunal to dispose of the matter afresh in the light of the provisions of Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act. January 14, 2009 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE