Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
P.C. Ananda Lakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Sudha Rao – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for document production in suit. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. affidavit mentions efforts to obtain documents. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. plaintiff argues for acceptance of secondary evidence. (Para 6) |
| 4. defendant opposes document production for lack of grounds. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court's review of trial court's reasoning. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 6. conditions for admissibility of secondary evidence; (Para 12 , 13) |
| 7. plaintiff's rights to present secondary evidence. (Para 14) |
| 8. court orders to allow production of documents. (Para 15) |
ORDER :
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR, J.
This petition is filed by the plaintiff aggrieved by the order dated 28.10.2025 passed on IA.No.16 in O.S.No.2914/2017 by XLI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
2. Parties shall be referred to as per their status before the trial Court.
3. In the suit filed in the year 2017, the plaintiff filed an application under Order VII Rule 14(3) read with Section 151 of CPC seeking to produce certain documents in order to prove his case. The documents sought to be produced are as under:
"1. Notarised copy of letter dated 15-10-2024 issued by the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District to Sri.Vijaya Kumar Redd
The court ruled that secondary evidence can be admissible under the CPC when original documents are unavailable, and trial courts must provide cogent reasoning for rejecting such applications.
The court held that secondary evidence obtained through the RTI Act can be allowed in court when original documents are unavailable, emphasizing the necessity of proper reasoning for rejecting such a....
Documents presented as secondary evidence must satisfy foundational requirements and cannot be admitted without proper explanation for the non-production of originals.
The second opportunity to produce documents under Order VIII Rule 1A(3) is for those who have produced documents with the written statement and have accountable reasons for not producing certain docu....
The appellate court may only admit additional evidence under specific conditions, which were not met by the petitioners, as they failed to demonstrate due diligence in producing the evidence during t....
Documents not mentioned in the plaint cannot be introduced later without court permission, emphasizing the necessity of timely submission under Order VII Rule 14 CPC.
A defendant may produce documents at a later stage in civil proceedings if a bona fide explanation for the delay is provided, and no surprise is caused to the opposing party.
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
