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

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.NAGAPRASANNA
SRI D L GANESH – Appellant
Versus
SRI SAMPATH KUMAR M N – Respondent


Heard Sri.Prasad.K.R.Rao, learned counsel appearing for

Sri.Venkatesh Somareddy, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question

proceedings in C.C.No.4459/2015, in particular, an order dated

27.12.2021. The order dated 27.12.2021 reads as follows:

“Counsel for complainant filed application

U/sec.65(B) of Indian Evidence Act, with a prayer

to

permit

him

to

producing

the

Electronics

documents i.e., cash book and balance sheet and

getting marked as exhibits in favour of the

complainant.

On the other had counsel for accused filed

objection and denied all the averments in the

3

application

and

contended

that,

the

present

application does not disclose the requirements

laidown in Sec.65(B) (4) of Indian Evidence Act.

Perused the application, objection and order

sheet. The complainant is further examined and got

marked Ex.P5 to 7. In the meanwhile complainant

has produced some computerized documents along

with the application.

Perused

the documents,

in

this regard

admissibility of electronic records the Hon’ble court

can be consider at the at the time of judgment.

Hence, Complainant is permitted to marking of

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top