Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
Tara Rani – Appellant
Versus
Bishani Devi (deceased) through LRs – Respondent
The present petition arises out of the impugned order dated 11.06.2025, passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Amb, District Una, H.P. in CMA No. 432 of 2025, titled Tara Rani vs. Bishani Devi & others, whereby application filed under Section 65 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for granting permission to prove the unregistered /oral will dated 12.09.1999 by way of leading the secondary evidence has been allowed.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the present petitioner filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the plaintiff is joint owner in possession with defendant and the proforma defendants qua the share to the extent of 1/6th share in the estate of deceased Rikhi Ram, S/O Babu Ram over the suit land. It was averred that the parties are class-I heirs of deceased Rikhi Ram, who died on 16.09.1999. After the death of deceased Rikhi Ram, the plaintiff is owner in possession alongwith defendant and proforma defendants in equal shares.
3. That the deceased Rikhi Ram had no intention to execute any Will in favour of defendant alone. In the month of October, 2012 when the plaintiff came to her parental house, then defendant No.1 started proclaiming that
Secondary evidence requires cogent evidence of document loss; mere assertions do not suffice under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Order VII Rule 14 CPC and Evidence Act Sections 65(a), 45 cannot be used belatedly to fill evidentiary lacunae; requires due diligence, notice, authentication; no supervisory interference absent perv....
Civil Law – Secondary Evidence – Reliability of - A party to lis may choose to file an application which is required to be considered by trial court but if any party to suit has laid foundation of le....
Court upheld the use of secondary evidence to prove a will's contents, despite procedural deficiencies, affirming the trial court's discretion.
The best evidence available should be produced before resorting to secondary evidence.
The trial court erred by allowing secondary evidence regarding the Will without sufficient pleadings and at a late stage of litigation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the party seeking to admit secondary evidence must establish the non-production of the original document as required under the Indian Evidence....
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
