2010 (2) CivCC 311
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
S.D.ANAND, J.
Hanumant Singh - Petitioner
Versus
Babu Singh and others- Respondents
Civil Revision No.935 of 2008
Decided on: 04.02.2010
Affidavits - Rebuttal Evidence - Validity of Affidavits in Rebuttal Evidence
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiffs-respondents were ordered to produce their entire evidence, but one of the plaintiffs did not appear for completion of cross-examination. The defendant-petitioner raised a plea that the affidavits tendered by the plaintiffs-respondents in rebuttal evidence could not be validly accepted.
Finding of the Court:
The learned Trial Court held that the plaintiffs-respondents were entitled to tender the affidavits in rebuttal evidence, but the High Court clarified that only the part of the affidavits relating to the rebuttal of defendant's evidence could be validly tendered.
Issues: Validity of affidavits in rebuttal evidence
Ratio Decidendi: The court clarified that only the part of the affidavits relating to the rebuttal of defendant's evidence could be validly tendered in rebuttal evidence, and any part relating to the affirmative character of evidence would not be accepted.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of accordingly.
S.D.ANAND, J. - The following facts are apparent from the record:
Initially, the evidence of the plaintiffs-respondents was ordered to be closed under the orders of the Court. That order was set aside by this Court, vide order dated 31.03.2006 and the plaintiffs - respondents were afforded one opportunity to produce their entire evidence. Prior to the closure of the evidence of the plaintiffs - respondents, Navdeep Singh (one of the plaintiffs) had appeared as PW1 in affirmative evidence. He did appear, for facing cross-examination, on 09.06.2006, but did not appear thereafter for completion of the cross-examination. It was thereafter that the evidence of the plaintiffs-respondents was ordered to be closed under the orders of the Court. Even after the allowance of the petition by this Court, Navdeep Singh plaintiff-respondent did not appear for cross-examination. However, the affidavits of Navdeep Singh aforementioned and also of one P.S. Sodhi were tendered in rebuttal evidence.
2. The defendant - petitioner raised a plea before the learned Trial Court that the affidavits being relatable to the evidence of the affirmative character could not be validly accepted in rebuttal evidence.
3. The plea did not find favour with the learned Trial Court which held that the plaintiffs-respondents were entitled to tender those affidavits in rebuttal evidence.
4. There can be no controversy about the fact that the affidavits tendered by the plaintiffs-respondents in rebuttal evidence cannot contain averments which pertains to the affirmative character of evidence. It is only that part of the affidavits, which relates to the rebuttal of defendant's evidence, which can be validly tendered into evidence. The learned Trial Court shall accept/consider only that part of the two affidavits which pertains to the evidence of rebuttal character which the plaintiffs-respondents are entitled to adduce in rebuttal of the evidence adduced by the petitioner herein to discharge the onus of issues which they were required to prove. Any part of the contents of those affidavits relatable to the averments of affirmative character would not be accepted in rebuttal evidence.
5. The petition shall stand disposed of accordingly.
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.