Back
RAJ MOHAN SINGH, HARPREET SINGH BRAR
Bharat Dixit – Appellant
Versus
Usha Dixit – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Harpreet Singh Brar, J.
The present appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 13.02.2017 passed by learned District Judge, Family Court-I, Faridabad, whereby a Civil Suit Number 34 of 2016/2012 titled as ‘Bharat Dixit v. Mrs.Usha Dixit' for declaration with consequential relief of permanent and mandatory injunction filed by the plaintiff/appellant against respondent, was dismissed.
Factual Background
2. Brief facts of the case are that plaintiff was married to defendant on 12.02.1996 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. Two daughters namely Kajal and Akansha were born out of the wedlock. It is averred that plaintiff is the absolute owner of Plot No.94, Block A, SGM Nagar, Faridabad measuring 200 sq.yards i.e. 30 ft x 60 ft. forming part of Khasra No.132/4, situated within the revenue estate of village Badkhal, Tehsil and District Faridabad. The said property was purchased by him from various persons by making payment of the entire sale consideration. General Power of Attorney was also executed in his favour. Thereafter the plaintiff executed sale deed No.14969 dated 29.12.2015 in favour of the defendant and she became owner in possession of the same. Cons
The plaintiff must establish ownership through clear evidence; failure to present the original documents undermines claims, reinforcing the trial court's decision.
The court established that secondary evidence is inadmissible without a foundational explanation for the absence of primary evidence, emphasizing strict adherence to evidentiary rules.
The need for foundational evidence for leading secondary evidence and the limitations on proving possession of immoveable property.
The court ruled that while a certified copy of a sale deed is admissible as secondary evidence, it does not suffice to prove the execution of the deed, which must demonstrate intention and legal vali....
A caretaker cannot transfer property rights, and secondary evidence is inadmissible without foundational proof of original document destruction.
Suit for declaration – Unregistered document -Secondary Evidence – Admissibility of - Secondary evidence is an evidence which may be given in the absence of that better evidence which law requires to....
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....
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....
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
