https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284611 An affidavit filed by a complainant under Section 145(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act is treated as evidence, and Section 145(2) requires only that the witness be made available for cross-examination; it does not mandate a fresh oral examination-in-chief, so the request to recall the complainant into the witness-box was rejected. Objections to proof or irregular proof of documents should ordinarily be decided when the document is tendered, while pure admissibility objections may be deferred to final judgment; objections based on insufficient stamp duty must be decided immediately. Marking a document as an exhibit does not by itself prove its contents or execution. en-us Mon, 22 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Nov 2023 15:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284611 An affidavit filed by a complainant under Section 145(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act is treated as evidence, and Section 145(2) requires only that the witness be made available for cross-examination; it does not mandate a fresh oral examination-in-chief, so the request to recall the complainant into the witness-box was rejected. Objections to proof or irregular proof of documents should ordinarily be decided when the document is tendered, while pure admissibility objections may be deferred to final judgment; objections based on insufficient stamp duty must be decided immediately. Marking a document as an exhibit does not by itself prove its contents or execution. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 22 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284611