1. The plaintiff has filed this application for examination of its witness, Mr. Olefirenko V.V. through video conferencing. It is submitted that the witness, Mr. Olefirenko V.V. is the constituted attorney of JSC Egle Collection and is based in Moscow, Russia and is unable to visit India for recording of his evidence but is willing to do so through video conferencing. It is submitted that the affidavit of the said witness has been filed as back as on 28th October, 2010.

2. Vide order dated 17th February, 2011, the Standing Counsel for Union of India was directed to confirm whether the facility of video conferencing and official Interpreter is available at the office of Consulate General at Moscow. The learned Senior Counsel has confirmed that the facility of video conferencing as well as interpreter is available at the Indian Embassy at Moscow and the same can be made available for recording of the evidence upon orders being passed by this Court.

3. The learned counsels for both the parties have referred to the following judgments with respect to the safeguards to be provided in the order relating to the examination of the witness through video conferencing:-

(i) Twentieth Century Fox Film vs. NRI Film Production, AIR 2003 Karnataka 148 –

“7. Coming to the merits of the matter, let me see as to whether the Audio-Video Link in the matter of evidence is permissible in law or not?

Order 18 of CPC provides for hearing of the suit and examination of witnesses. Order 18 Rule 3 provides for evidence where other issues are involved. Recording of evidence is provided under Order 18, Rule 4. The CPC is amended from time to time in the interest of speedy disposal and to avoid cumbersome procedure in the matter of conducting civil trials. It is a matter of fact that civil proceedings in this country take a few years as experience reveals. To get over this normal procedural delay, the Government has thought it fit to amended the Act in the larger interest of speedy disposal. The statement of objects and reasons of CPC Amendment Act 1999 would show that the maximum time is consumed in recording evidence by the courts and it is proposed to reduce such delay by making provision for evidence by affidavit. The object refers to the report of the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Malimath. and the Law Commission Recommendations. The Act was amended in 1999 in terms of the Act 46/1999 it was subsequently amended in CPC amendment Act of 2002. Order 18. Rule 4 provides for examination in chief of a witness by way of an affidavit. Sub-rule (2) provides for cross-examination and re-examination of witnesses being done in attendance whose evidence by affidavit has been furnished to the Court is to be taken by the Court or the commissioner appointed by it. The Court may also take into consideration the relevant factors as it think fit in terms of the rule.

xxxxxx

Audio-Video Link is a technology developed by electronic media to avoid the physical presence and to avoid the loss in time. It is a speedy method evolved for the purpose of speedy decision. Even in Audio-Video Link party is definitely present in person and his presence is reflected on the screen. The word 'in attendance' under Order 18, Rule 3(4)(2) is to be understood as the person being present and it need not be physical presence. The presence on the screen is as good as attendance for the purpose of Order 18, Rule 3(4) (2) of the Rules. After all law only requires the presence of the witness and it does not matter as to how he is present.

xxxxxx

Order 18, Rule 3(4)(3) which provides for recording evidence either by writing or mechanically in the presence of a Judge. Audio-Video Link is a mechanical process where the party is present on the screen and there is a mechanical divisor recording the evidence…”

“10. In the light of these two judgments and in the light of the amendment to CPC, the observation of the learned trial Judge requires my interference. At the same time this Court is of the view