A.No.4699 of 2022

A.No.4699 of 2022

in

C.S.No.975 of 2010

C.SARAVANAN, J.

The application has been filed by the applicant/plaintiff to mark the

photo copy of the Censor Certificate dated 17.09.2008.

2. It is the specific case of the applicant/plaintiff that the Censor

Certificate was issued to the applicant/plaintiff, however, it was misplaced

and was untraceable. While witness was being examined and an objection has

been raised by the respondents/defendants, hence, this application has been

filed to permit the applicant/plaintiff to mark the photo copy of the Censor

Certificate dated 17.09.2008, as Exhibit No.P4, as a secondary evidence in

terms of Section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

3. The application is opposed by the third respondent/defendant on the

ground that it is for the applicant/plaintiff to prove that the alleged photo copy

was prepared from the original or that it was compared with the original or

prepared from a copy compared with the original.

1/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.4699 of 2022

4. It is submitted that in absence of any material to substantiate the

above, the photo copy of the Censor Certificate cannot be allowed to be

marked as a secondary evidence. It is submitted that it is not sufficient to

merely state that the photo copy that was taken was from the original Censor

Certificate.

5. I have perused the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for

the applicant/plaintiff and the learned counsel for the third

respondent/defendant. Other respondents/defendants have already set ex-

parte.

6. Ordinarily under Section 61 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872,

contents of documents are required to be proved either by primary or by

secondary evidence. Primary evidence means, the document itself produced

for inspection of the Court.

7. Under Section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a secondary

evidence means:

2/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.4699 of 2022

(1)certified copies given under the provisions

hereinafter contained;

(2)copies made from the original by mechanical

processes which in themselves ensure the

accuracy of the copy, and copies compared with

such copies;

(3)copies made from or compared with the original;

(4)counterparts of documents as against the parties

who did not execute them;

(5)oral accounts of the contents of a document given

by some person who has himself seen it.

8. A reading of Section 63, makes it clear that copies made from the

original by mechanical process which in themselves ensure the accuracy of

the copy, and copies compared with such copies can be allowed to be marked

as a secondary evidence.

9. The Censor Certificate in question has been issued to the

applicant/plaintiff which appears to have been misplaced. The very photo

copy from the copying machine requires no comparison with the original in

these modern days.

3/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.4699 of 2022

C.SARAVANAN, J.

rgm

10. Be that as it may, the document is allowed to be marked as a

secondary evidence. However, the applicant/plaintiff shall obtain certified

copy of the original from the Censor Board and produce before the Court at

the time of final hearing.

11. Subject to the above, the document is allowed to mark.

Accordingly, the application stands allowed.

19.12.2022

(1/2)

rgm

A.No.4699 of 2022

in

C.S.No.975 of 2010

4/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.4699 of 2022

5/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis