Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
Venkata Reddy, S/o. Late P. Rama Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Mudalapa, S/o. Late Dasappa – Respondent
ORDER :
S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
This petition by defendant Nos.2 and 3 in O.S.No.32/2010 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Hoskote, is directed against the impugned common order passed on I.As. by the Trial Court allowing the applications filed by the respondents – plaintiffs to reopen the evidence of the plaintiff and by recalling PW1 and for permission to mark Photostat copy of the Edurukararupatra / re- conveyance deed as secondary evidence in support of their respective claim.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the caveator – respondent No.1 and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent Nos.1 and 2 – plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit against the petitioners – defendant Nos.2 and 3 and other defendants for permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property. The said suit is being contested by the defendants. The plaintiffs having adduced evidence, the matter was posted for evidence of defendants and at the stage of cross-examination of PW1, plaintiffs filed three applications viz.,. (i) Application to reopen the evidence of the plaintif
The court affirmed that reopening evidence to allow the introduction of secondary evidence is permissible when original documents are unavailable, provided the procedural requirements are met.
Documents presented as secondary evidence must satisfy foundational requirements and cannot be admitted without proper explanation for the non-production of originals.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the party seeking to admit secondary evidence must establish the non-production of the original document as required under the Indian Evidence....
A photocopy of a document is inadmissible as secondary evidence if the original document is not duly stamped, per the Indian Stamp Act.
Under Section 151 or Order 18 Rule 17 of the Code is not intended to be used routinely, merely for the asking. If so used, it will defeat the very purpose of various amendments to the Code to expedit....
A certified copy of a registered sale deed is deemed a public document under Section 74(2) of the Indian Evidence Act and admissible in evidence as secondary evidence of the public record, according ....
Judgments not inter partes can be admissible to show rights in property disputes under the Indian Evidence Act, aiding in establishing asserted ownership despite objections based on inadmissibility.
Unregistered sale deeds cannot be admitted as evidence to establish rights due to statutory inadmissibility, even if previously marked as evidence under objection.
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
