Back
NYAPATHY VIJAY
Palakurthi Raja Gopala Rao – Appellant
Versus
Chaluvadi Krishna Prasada Rao – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the civil petition and claim. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. request for admission of secondary evidence. (Para 3) |
| 3. law on admissibility of secondary evidence. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. court's procedural observations on document admissibility. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 5. conclusion and order of the court. (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT
1. This civil revision petition is filed questioning the order dated 26.09.2022 in IA No.379 of 2022 in OS No.362 of 2021 passed by the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, Krishna District.
2. Petitioner is the plaintiff. The suit OS No.372 of 2021 was filed for recovery of an amount of Rs.4,82,660/-. The basis for the claim was that the plaintiff was doing business in Shop Bearing No.11/468-469 under the name and style of Sri Radha Krishna General Stores and was selling Paints of different companies. The respondent had approached the petitioner/plaintiff and they had entered into a business transfer agreement on 28.03.2018 and accordingly the business of the petitioner was transferred to respondent/defendant for a period of 5 years i.e., from 01.04.2018 to 31.03.2023 under a lease agreement dated 28.03.2018. Though the respondent/defendant had taken the pr
Admissibility of secondary evidence should be provisionally recognized at the trial stage, with objections resolved at final judgment to expedite proceedings.
Trial courts must prioritize efficient proceedings, allowing tentative admission of evidence in cases of lost originals, as stipulated under Section 65(c) of the Evidence Act.
A party must provide credible evidence of a document's loss to admit secondary evidence under Section 65(c) of the Indian Evidence Act, and inconsistencies in claims can undermine this request.
Secondary evidence under Sections 65-B and 65-C of the Indian Evidence Act requires proof of loss or unavailability of original documents; mere marking of documents does not equate to their proof.
A photocopy of a document cannot be admitted as secondary evidence without satisfying the preconditions set forth in Section 66 of the Indian Evidence Act, including proof of the original's loss or a....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
