1978 (7) TMI 242

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., in Title Appeal No. 10 of 1973. 2. The plaintiff brought the suit for declaration of his title to the suit property on the allegation that the land originally belonged to his brother, Syed Ali Jotedar, who had gifted the land to him about 14 or 15 years ago. Since then, he was in possession of the suit land. But later on he discovered that Khatian had been issued to the defendant in respect o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ee of the trial court and decreed the plaintiff's suit. 5. The ground on which the plaintiff's suit has been decreed by the lower appellate Court is that the Ext. 'Cha' which is a certified copy of the sale deed executed by Syed All to Jahiruddin, is not admissible in evidence, inasmuch as, the original was not produced and conditions necessary for giving secondary evidence unde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r. M.A. Laskar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent, relying on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1966 SC 1457, submits that the decision of the lower appellate court was correct, inasmuch as, the defendant failed to satisfy the conditions laid down under Section 65 of the Evidence Act in order to give the secondary evidence. In my opinion, Section 65 of the Evidence Act i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....roof of the contents of the public documents or parts of the public documents of which they purport to be copies. It is not disputed that Ext. 'Cha' is a certified copy of the sale deed executed by Syed Ali in favour of Johiruddin. It, therefore, cannot be argued that Ext. 'Cha' is not admissible in evidence. 8. That apart, when this deed, Ext. 'Cha' was proved by D.W....