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 omission of the witness's signature on a deposition recorded on commission under Rule 4 of Chapter XXII of the Calcutta High Court Rules, 1914 rendered the deposition inadmissible in evidence, despite the correctness and authenticity of the deposition being undisputed.
Analysis: Rule 4 required the deposition to be taken down, read over, and, where necessary, translated to the witness so that mistakes or omissions could be corrected; those requirements were essential and had to be strictly complied with. The further requirement that the deposition be signed by the witness served to indicate acceptance of its correctness and to assure authenticity, but it was not essential to the completeness of the deposition itself. Where the deposition was otherwise duly recorded, read over, accepted as correct, and its authenticity was not in dispute, the absence of the witness's signature was only a technical defect. In construing a procedural rule, the interpretation that advances justice and avoids needless invalidation of reliable evidence was preferred.
Conclusion: The requirement of the witness's signature was directory, not mandatory, and the omission did not invalidate the depositions or justify their exclusion from evidence when their correctness and authenticity were undisputed.