https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296015 Secondary evidence of a mortgage deed is admissible only after satisfactory proof that the original was lost or destroyed; a bare assertion that it was sent elsewhere or unavailable is insufficient. Where the deed is attested, execution must still be proved in law, ordinarily by examining at least one attesting witness unless execution is admitted or otherwise dispensed with. A pleading stating that property was bought subject to a mortgage did not amount to an unqualified admission of execution or liability. As the alleged attesting witnesses were not examined and the burden of proof remained unmet, the mortgage deed was not proved and relief was refused. en-us Fri, 17 Jan 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Jun 2021 10:29:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296015 Secondary evidence of a mortgage deed is admissible only after satisfactory proof that the original was lost or destroyed; a bare assertion that it was sent elsewhere or unavailable is insufficient. Where the deed is attested, execution must still be proved in law, ordinarily by examining at least one attesting witness unless execution is admitted or otherwise dispensed with. A pleading stating that property was bought subject to a mortgage did not amount to an unqualified admission of execution or liability. As the alleged attesting witnesses were not examined and the burden of proof remained unmet, the mortgage deed was not proved and relief was refused. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 17 Jan 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296015