Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ALKA SARIN
Krishan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Jamana Devi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. context of revision petition under article 227 (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding secondary evidence and its necessity (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT :
ALKA SARIN, J.
1. The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order dated 18.11.2023 (Annexure P-5) whereby the application filed by the plaintiff-respondent under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for permission to lead secondary evidence has been allowed.
2. Brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff- respondent filed a suit for recovery of Rs.28,50,000/- alongwith interest. Written statement was filed. During the plaintiff-respondent’s evidence, an application was filed by the plaintiff-respondent for production of secondary evidence on the ground that in a Bail Application arising out of FIR No.256 dated 24.06.2014 registered under Sections 420, 406, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station City Bahadurgarh, which was filed in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar, the complainant therein had produced the original agreement to sell and the Court after retaining a photocopy of the same had sent it to
Secondary evidence is admissible when the non-availability of the original document is properly explained.
The onus of proving the loss of the original document and the need to evaluate the evidence to establish the existence, validity, and genuineness of the agreement are crucial in allowing secondary ev....
The best evidence available should be produced before resorting to secondary evidence.
Secondary evidence must be of a document which is admissible in evidence.
Secondary evidence cannot be admitted without establishing the existence and non-production of original documents as required by Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act.
The necessity to prove the existence and execution of the original document before admitting secondary evidence under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Secondary evidence requires strict adherence to conditions outlined in Section 65 of the Evidence Act, which were not met in this case.
A photocopy of a document cannot be admitted as secondary evidence without satisfying the preconditions set forth in Section 66 of the Indian Evidence Act, including proof of the original's loss or a....
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
