P.C.JAIN
Rajasthan Golden Transport Company – Appellant
Versus
LRs. of Amrit Lal – Respondent
(2). I have heard Mr. A.K. Acharya, the learned counsel appearing for the defendant-petitioner and Mr. Bhupendra Bhatnagar, the learned counsel for the plaintiff-non-petitioner.
(3). The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 1.12.1997 on the ground that the learned lower court has not stated a single word about the fact as to whether the plaintiff-non-petitioner was entitled to produce the secondary evidence. Section 65 of the Evidence Act contains the cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given. Looking to the nature of the document, it could have been presumed that the original was with the witness but before according permission to lead secondary evidence, a notice under Sec. 55 of the Evidence Act ought to have been given to the witness req
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.