CR No. 1527 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No. 1527 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.10.2011 Amar Singh & Anr. ...Petitioners Vs. Gurnam Singh & Ors. ...Respondents And CR No. 1528 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.10.2011 Amar Singh & Anr. ...Petitioners Vs. Inder Singh & Ors. ...Respondents BEFORE: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.C.B.Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Vivek Suri, Advocate, for the respondents. --- A.N.Jindal, J. CM No.21583-CII of 2011 in CR No.1527 of 2011 & CM No.21584-CII of 2011 in CR No.1528 of 2011 Civil Miscs. are allowed. Main cases are pre-poned to today. CR No. 1527 of 2011 2 CR No.1527 of 2011 This order shall dispose of two Civil Revision Nos. 1527 and 1528 of 2011 titled as Amar Singh & Anr. Vs. Gurnam Singh & Ors., and Amar Singh & Anr. Vs. Inder Singh & Ors., respectively, as common question of law and facts are involved in both the revision petitions. The facts for convenience are taken from CR No.1527 of 2011. This petition assails the order dated 15.11.2010 (Annexure P.3.) passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula dismissing the application (Annexure P.1) of petitioner/defendant No.1 for leading secondary evidence of the Will dated 8.11.1995 executed by Late Balwant Singh on the ground that original Will has been destroyed and could not be traced. In order to fortify the fact that the Will has been destroyed, he filed an affidavit on record and also placed certified copy of the Will to prove the existence of the Will. Trial court though has rightly observed to the effect that secondary evidence could be invited only after the existence of document is proved, yet it has not taken pains to examine as to how the existence of a document needs to be established. In the present case, since the petitioners have stated on solemn affirmation that the original Will has been destroyed and by making such statement they were not going to be benefited. There is nothing to prove that the certified copy of the Will is a manipulated or CR No. 1527 of 2011 3 concocted document. It would also be observed that the existence of document could only be proved either by producing certified copy of the document or any such document containing reference of such document by examining any other evidence. As regards the loss or damage of the document, the affidavits of the petitioners were sufficient to enable the court to hold as such. Even otherwise, a document particularly a Will needs a lot of evidence to be proved. Still the petitioners have to prove that it was a genuine, executed by the testator of his/her own free will and has lost the Will. Trial court appears to have taken wrong view of the matter stating that existence of document has not been proved. In view of the above discussion, both these revision petitions are accepted and the impugned orders are set aside and the applications for leading secondary evidence are accepted subject to just exceptions with regard to admissible and mode of proof. (A.N.Jindal) 20.10.2011 Judge rp