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

1975 Supreme(P&H) 143

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Rajendra Nath Mittal, J.
Parsa Singh
Versus
Parkash Kaur
Civil Revision No. 44 of 1974,
Decided On : NOVEMBER 10, 1975

A certified copy of a registered will is not admissible in evidence without laying down foundation for introducing secondary evidence.

Headnote:

EVIDENCE ACT - SECTION 65 - SECONDARY EVIDENCE - REGISTERED WILL - CERTIFIED COPY - ADMISSIBILITY - A certified copy of a registered will is not admissible in evidence without laying down foundation for introducing secondary evidence.

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff filed a suit for possession of land, claiming to be the heirs of the original owner who had executed a will in their favor. The defendants denied the execution of the will. The plaintiffs applied to lead secondary evidence regarding the will, which was alleged to have been lost.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to produce the certified copy of the will obtained from the Registrar's Office to prove it without establishing the loss of the original will.

Issues: Whether a certified copy of a registered will is admissible in evidence without laying down foundation for introducing secondary evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Section 65 of the Evidence Act and held that secondary evidence of the contents of a document can be given only in certain cases, including when the original is lost or destroyed. The court further held that a registered will is not a public document and, therefore, does not fall within the exception provided in Section 65(e). The court also held that Section 65(f) does not apply to the present case because the certified copy of the will is not a document of which a certified copy is permitted by law to be given in evidence without laying down foundation for introducing secondary evidence.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the revision petition filed by the plaintiff.

Judgment

1. This revision petition has been filed by Parsa Singh, plaintiff, against the order of the Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Batala, dated 12.12.1973.

2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the property in dispute originally belonged to Bal Singh, deceased, resident of village Sagarpura. Smt. Tej Kaur, the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs, was the owner of land situated in village Basrai. She exchanged the land in dispute with Bal Singh. The said Smt. Tej Kaur executed a will in favour of the plaintiffs on 18.04.1958, regarding the property in dispute. They instituted a suit for possession of the land in dispute as heirs of Smt. Tej Kaur. The defendants contested the suit and denied the allegations of the plaintiffs, inter alia, pleading that no will was executed by Smt. Tej Kaur in favour of the plaintiffs. When the evidence was being led, the plaintiffs made an application seeking permission to lead secondary evidence regarding the will which was alleged to have been executed by Smt. Tej Kaur in their favour on the ground that the original one had been lost. The application was contested by the defendants. The trial Court dismissed the application on the ground that the plaintiffs had failed to make out a case to lead secondary evidence in accordance with the provisions of Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Parsa Singh plaintiff, has come up in revision against the order of the Subordinate Judge 1st Class, dated 12.12.1973.

3. The only contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is entitled to produce the certified copy of the will obtained from the Office of the Registrar, to prove it in spite of the fact that the loss of the original will is not established. In order to determine this controversy, it will be necessary to refer to some provisions of the Act and the Indian Registration Act.

4. Part II of the Act relates to On Proof . Chapter V. which starts with Sec. 61 and ends with Sec. 90, deals with documentary evidence. Section 61 says that the contents of documents may be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence. Section 62 relates to primary evidence; Section 63, to secondary evidence; Section 64, to proof of documents by primary evidence; Section 65, to cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given; and Sec. 74, to public documents. Section 64 says that the documents must be proved by primary evidence except in the cases thereinafter mentioned. Section 65 is as follows:-

"65. Secondary evidence may be given of the existence, condition or contents of a document in the following cases:-

(a) when the original is shown or appears to be in the possession or power- of the person against whom the documents is sought to be proved, or,

of any person out of reach of, or not subject to, the process of the Court, or

of any person legally bound to produce it,

and when, after the notice mentioned in Sec. 66, such person does not produce it;

(b) when the existence, condition or contents of the original have been proved to be admitted in writing by the person against whom it is proved or by his representative-in-interest;

(c) when the original has been destroyed or lost, or when the party offering evidence of its contents cannot, for any other reason not arising from his own default or neglect, produce it in reasonable time;

(d) xx xx xx xx

(e) when the original is a public document within the meaning of Sec. 74;

(f) when the original is a document of which a certified copy is permitted by this Act, or by any other law in force in India, to be given in evidence;

(g) xx xx xx xx

In cases (a) (c) and (d), any secondary evidence of the contents of the document is admissible.

In case (b), the written admission is admissible.

In case (e) or (f), a certified copy of the document, but no other kind of secondary evidence, is admissible.

xx xx xx xx."

Relevant clause of Section 74 is as under:-

74. The following documents



















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
whatsapp-icon Back to top