Party Cannot Cite Witness's Old Age To Justify Non-Production Of Original Rent Agreement In Civil Suit: HP High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that a party cannot rely on the old age of a person to justify his failure to produce the witness or prove the alleged original rent agreement in a civil suit.

The Court reiterated that when a witness is aged, the law provides a clear mechanism for recording such testimony through a Court-appointed Commissioner.

Justice Ajay Mohan Goel remarked that: "The contention that Roshal Lal is an aged person, cannot come to the rescue of the petitioner because if that was the case, the petitioner could have had moved an appropriate application to have the statement of Roshan Lal recorded by the appointment of a Commissioner.”

In 2022, the petitioner sought permission to lead secondary evidence of a photocopy of a rent agreement in a civil suit between him and the respondent.

He contended that an original agreement was executed between him and one Roshan Lal, who allegedly lost the document.

The application was rejected by the Trial Court on the ground that there was no material to demonstrate the execution of the agreement.

The High Court reiterated that secondary evidence can be allowed only when proof of loss of the original or acknowledgement of its existence is proved by the opposite party.

Further, the Court observed that the application for secondary evidence was filed three years after the matter had been started, which clearly indicated a delay.

Thus, the High Court upheld the Trial Court's order and dismissed the petition.

Case Name: Shri Vinod Kalia v/s Bhagwati Public Aushdhalaya through Shri Rattan Chand Kalia

Case No.: CMPMO No.650 of 2025

Date of Decision: 11.11.2025

For the Petitioner: Mr. Nitin Soni, Advocate

For the Respondent: Notice Not issued

Click Here To Read/Download Order