<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1958 (11) TMI 31 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176071</link>
    <description>Notes of attendance prepared by a witness from transaction-related conversations qualify as prior statements for corroboration under the Indian Evidence Act where they record matters relevant to that witness&#039;s testimony. The ordinary meaning of &quot;statement made by&quot; does not require communication to another person; comparison with other evidentiary provisions supports treating an uncommunicated written record as a statement. Rules permitting a witness to refresh memory do not restrict this corroborative use. Admissibility is distinct from evidentiary weight, which remains subject to assessment. The notes were therefore admissible to corroborate the witness&#039;s evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2015 15:14:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=408571" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1958 (11) TMI 31 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176071</link>
      <description>Notes of attendance prepared by a witness from transaction-related conversations qualify as prior statements for corroboration under the Indian Evidence Act where they record matters relevant to that witness&#039;s testimony. The ordinary meaning of &quot;statement made by&quot; does not require communication to another person; comparison with other evidentiary provisions supports treating an uncommunicated written record as a statement. Rules permitting a witness to refresh memory do not restrict this corroborative use. Admissibility is distinct from evidentiary weight, which remains subject to assessment. The notes were therefore admissible to corroborate the witness&#039;s evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176071</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>