SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(Del) 38

F.S.GILL
PARKASH RAI – Appellant
Versus
J. N. DHAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARUN MOHAN, G.L.SANGHI, HARISH CHANDER

F. S. Gill,j.

( 1 ) THE plantiff has closed his evidence in the affirmative. Now the defendants are required to produce their evidence. At this stage, the defendants have made the present application (I. A. 396 of 1976) under Sections 74 and 76 of the Indian Evidence Act and have appended therewith copies of the following documents :

(I) Copies of 17 orders passed by the Estate Officer ; (ii) Copies of affidavits of Jagdish Popli, J. M. Sehgal and K. L. Bansal. (iii) Copy of the letter dated 8th January, 1976 sent by Shri Prakash Rai to the Estate Officer intimating his change of address. (iv) Copy of the statement of K. L. Bansal made before the Estate Officer on 10th March, 1975 and concluded on 14th November, 1975.

( 2 ) SO far as the production of copies of the orders are concerned, there is no dispute. They can be undoubtedly tendered in evidence.

( 3 ) AS regards the affidavits, copies of such documents cannot be taken in evidence. What evidence means and includes is defined in section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act. Affidavits are not included in its definition. On the contrary, affidavits have been expressly excluded by virtue of section I of the Indian Evidence Act. Therefo
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top