Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether photocopies could be received as secondary evidence and whether the conditions for admission of secondary evidence under Section 65(a) were satisfied.
Analysis: Secondary evidence is admissible only when the law permits departure from primary evidence and the foundational requirements for such admission are first established. Section 63 exhaustively defines secondary evidence, while Section 64 makes primary evidence the general rule. Under Section 65(a), secondary evidence of a document's existence, condition or contents may be given only when the original is shown or appears to be in the possession or power of the opposite party or another person who does not produce it after notice under Section 66. A mere photocopy, without proof of the circumstances bringing the case within Section 65(a), does not by itself satisfy the legal requirements for secondary evidence.
Conclusion: The photocopies were not admissible as secondary evidence because the requirements of Section 65(a) were not met. The appeal was therefore liable to fail.
Ratio Decidendi: Secondary evidence can be admitted only after the statutory foundation for non-production of the original is established, and photocopies alone are insufficient unless the case falls within Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.