THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3479 of 2008 ORDER: Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner who is the plaintiff filed this Revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking to assail the correctness of the order, dated 25.06.2008, passed in I.A.No.25 of 2008 in O.S.No.1770 of 1998 on the file of the II Additional Rent Controller-cum-XIV Junior Civil Judge, Hyderabad, dismissing the application filed under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, wherein he sought for a permission to lead secondary evidence in respect of a sale transaction. In support thereof, the petitioner herein filed Xerox copy of the sale deed. The Court below after consideration did not find favour with the petitioner and dismissed the said application. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition. Having regard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and on perusal of the material on record, it is needless to mention that in an application of this nature, which is a formal one, the merits need not be gone into nor other requirements are mandatory as prescribed under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act. It is only after grant of such permission, the burden will lie on the petitioner to come out with all such evidence as to the existence or non-existence or the copy being made thereunder by appropriate cogent evidence. However, for want of the same, the present application at this juncture cannot be dismissed and any such action would be totally pre-mature. In the circumstances, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and I.A.No.25 of 2008 in O.S.No.1770 of 1998 on the file of the II Additional Rent Controller-cum-XIV Junior Civil Judge, Hyderabad is allowed, subject to condition of the petitioner complying and making out a case by adducing appropriate evidence as mandatorily required under law. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO 10th December 2010 DR