Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
Meena Devi – Appellant
Versus
K. Avinash Kumar Singh – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs being aggrieved by the order dated 19.06.2025 in I.A.No.251 of 2025 in O.S.No.21 of 2022 passed by the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Kamareddy (for short the trial Court) in allowing the petition filed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2/defendant Nos.1 and 2 herein praying the trial Court to receive the photo copy/Xerox copy of the unregistered will deed dated 23.08.2020 and photo copy/Xerox copy of legal notice dated 13.12.2021 as secondary evidence under Section 60 (C) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the parties herein shall be referred to, as they are arrayed before the trial Court.
2. Heard Mr. Aadesh Varma, learned counsel for the revision petitioners and Mr. S. Srinivasa Chary, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Perused the record.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the revision petitioners are the plaintiffs before the trial Court, who have filed suit in O.S.No.21 of 2022 before the trial Court, seeking to declare them as owners of the suit schedule property as per the registered will deed document No.171/III/2018 dated 10.07.2018;
Photocopies cannot be admitted as secondary evidence under Section 60(c) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam without satisfying strict legal requirements, including proof of loss of originals.
The court clarified that receiving documents into record does not equate to their admissibility as evidence without strict compliance with statutory requirements.
Secondary evidence may be admissible when the original document is lost or misplaced, provided sufficient justification for its non-production is established.
Secondary evidence requires cogent evidence of document loss; mere assertions do not suffice under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility of secondary evidence, specifically the photocopy of a Will, and the requirement to prove the signature of deceased attestors. Th....
In order to admit secondary evidence of a document, the party seeking to admit the evidence must lay a proper foundation by showing that the original document is unavailable and that the secondary ev....
A document required to be registered is not admissible into evidence under Section 49 of Registration Act.
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
