TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (2) TMI 608
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is directed against the order dated 1-12-1997 whereby the learned lower Court has permitted the plaintiff-non-petitioner to cross-examine DW 1 Amarjeet singh with reference to the copy of the assessment order for the year 1980-81 filed by the plaintiff under Section 65 of the Evidence Act. 2.1 have beared Mr. A.K. Acharya the learned counsel appearing for the de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... In the instant case, no notice was given to the witness to produce the document in original. Hence, the plaintiff was not entitled to produce the photostat copy of the alleged assessment order" for the year 1980-81 and to confront it to the witness. 4. The learned counsel for the non-petitioner has supported the impugned order on the ground that the assessment order related to the witness a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion must have been in possession of the witness because it related to him and, therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to produce the secondary evidence. However, under Section 66 of the Evidence Act, it is obligatory that secondary evidence of the contents of the documents referred to in Section 65 clause (a) shall not be given unless the party proposing to given such secondary evidence has previo....