https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309486 Order 18 Rule 3A CPC regulates the sequence of witness examination, but it does not justify exempting a party from giving evidence when that party is best placed to speak to the facts in issue. The court applied the best evidence principle and noted that, where a party bearing the burden of proof withholds such evidence, the opposite side may rely on adverse inference under Section 114 illustration (g) of the Evidence Act. An exemption in such circumstances would limit the court's ability to receive the best available evidence. The exemption from tendering evidence was therefore set aside, while the rest of the trial court's order remained undisturbed. en-us Mon, 05 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Sep 2023 08:52:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309486 Order 18 Rule 3A CPC regulates the sequence of witness examination, but it does not justify exempting a party from giving evidence when that party is best placed to speak to the facts in issue. The court applied the best evidence principle and noted that, where a party bearing the burden of proof withholds such evidence, the opposite side may rely on adverse inference under Section 114 illustration (g) of the Evidence Act. An exemption in such circumstances would limit the court's ability to receive the best available evidence. The exemption from tendering evidence was therefore set aside, while the rest of the trial court's order remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 05 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309486