Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 11th August, 2025
NEENA KHANNA .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Shalini Kapoor
Through: Mr. Ankit Jain, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Swastik Singh, Advocate.
JUDGMENT
1. Petitioner seeks early hearing of the matter.
2. The Court has gone through the impugned order dated 01.10.2018 whereby the request of plaintiff/petitioner seeking to lead secondary evidence was disallowed, primarily, for the reason that the plaintiff herself had, at earlier point of time, during the pendency of present suit only, had sought exemption from filing original documents, which was allowed by this Court, when the suit was pending before this Court on its original side. Thereafter also, she moved an application seeking to place on record the document in question i.e. original Will of Sh. R.S. Tandon.
3. However, during admission/denial of documents, the Will in question was found to be a photocopy and not the original one and it was in the CM(M) 1396/2018 2 abovesaid backdrop of the facts that the plaintiff sought permission to lead secondary evidence.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner strongly relies upon Prem Chandra Jain and Others. vs Sri Ram and Others.: 2009 SCC OnLine Del 3202 and submits that learned Trial Court should have, at least, granted petitioner a due opportunity of leading evidence, with respect to the controversy in question and her application should not have been decided, merely, on the basis of the averments made in the application.
5. Para 5 of the abovesaid judgment reads as under:-
6. Learned Senior Counsel for respondent also submits that he would have no objection if the present petition is disposed of in terms of the abovesaid specific directions and that the learned Trial Court can always, at a later stage of the case, can take appropriate decision whether the petitioner CM(M) 1396/2018 3 herein meets the foundational requirement for leading secondary evidence or not.
7. Present petition is, accordingly, disposed of in aforesaid terms and the impugned order stands modified to the abovesaid extent and learned Trial Court would, therefore, be at liberty to consider the above aspect of leading secondary evidence afresh in terms of Prem Chandra Jain (supra).
8. Pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
9. Date already fixed i.e. 28.10.2025 stands cancelled.
JUDGE AUGUST 11, 2025/ck/sw/JS