Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
S.Sreenivas Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Sudha Rao – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for production of documents. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details of documents produced. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. plaintiff's argument for document production. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. respondent's opposition to document production. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court's analysis on trial court's errors. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. court's order to allow document production. (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.2918/2017 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. Original Letter dated 15-10-2024 issued by the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District to the Plaintiff together with copies of documents.
2. Photostat copy of petition in (LRF) V.P.C. No.1/96-97 dated 02-08-1996 on the file of the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District, filed by A.Prahal
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....
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.
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....
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.
Secondary evidence is admissible only when a factual foundation for the non-production of original documents is established, and the trial court must provide a reasoned order for its decisions.
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....
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
