Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
This judgment was delivered on March 19, the Supreme Court has held that there is no need to file an application seeking permission to produce secondary evidence.
The secondary evidence cannot be ousted for consideration only because an application for permission to lead secondary evidence.
The secondary evidence cannot be ousted for consideration only because an application for permission to lead secondary evidence was not filed, observed the court.
The bench comprising of Justices L Nageswara Rao and Hemant Gupta in the case Dhanpat Vs. Sheo Ram through Legal Representatives.
The case was a civil appeal, in which the validity of a will was under dispute. In a partition suit, the defendants had produced a will, to deny the claim of the plaintiffs for share in the ancestral property. The certified copy of the registered will was produced during the trial, on the ground that the original was lost.
On the challenge raised by the appellant in the Supreme Court regarding the production of secondary evidence, the bench stated:
There is no cross examination of any of the witnesses of the defendants in respect of loss of original wil. Section 65 of the Evidence Act permits secondary evidence of existence, condition, or contents of a document including the cases where the original has been destroyed or lost. The plaintiff had admitted the execution of the will though it was alleged to be the result of fraud and misrepresentation. The execution of the will was not disputed by the plaintiff but only proof of the will was the subject matter in the suit. Therefore, once the evidence of the defendants is that the original will was lost and the certified copy is produced, the defendants have made out sufficient ground for leading of secondary evidence.
The bench observed that there was no need for application for producing secondary evidence. There is no requirement that an application of Section 65(c) of the Evidence Act before the secondary evidence is led. A party to the lis may choose to file an application which is required to be considered by the trial court but if any party to the suit has laid foundation of leading of secondary evidence, either in the plaint or in evidence, the secondary evidence cannot be ousted for consideration only because an application for permission to lead secondary evidence was not filed.
The appeal was dismissed by the court, and the court stated that the will was in terms of Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act.
86540
103860
630
114
59824