Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
Tara Rani – Appellant
Versus
Bishani Devi (deceased) through LRs – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of the factual background regarding claims to property (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. defendants' contestation against the plaintiff's claims (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. defendant's application for secondary evidence (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. arguments against the trial court's order (Para 15 , 22) |
| 5. primary evidence must be established for secondary evidence admission (Para 24 , 28 , 29) |
| 6. court's decision to set aside previous order and direct re-evaluation (Para 33 , 36 , 37) |
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 Ba
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....
Validation of secondary evidence requires strict adherence to stipulations under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, failing which the application may be quashed.
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
