RAKESH MOHINDRA versus ANITA BERI AND OTHERS

RAKESH MOHINDRA versus ANITA BERI AND OTHERS

The trial court correctly allowed secondary evidence after all reasonable efforts were made to locate the original; compliance with Section 65 of the Evidence Act was established. The High Court erred in setting aside this order. The mere fact that some signatures on documents were not legible is not sufficient to...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Rakesh Mohindra; Respondent: Anita Beri; Respondent: Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order Setting Aside Trial Court Order Permitting Secondary Evidence
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Secondary Evidence, Proof of Documents, Specific Relief, Title and Possession, Mutation of Property
Evidence Law Property Law Civil Procedure Admissibility of Secondary Evidence Proof of Documents Specific Relief Title and Possession Mutation of Property

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rakesh Mohindra

Appellant

Anita Beri

Respondent

Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order Setting Aside Trial Court Order Permitting Secondary Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether secondary evidence of a document (letter of disclaimer) can be admitted when the original cannot be produced despite best efforts
  2. 2 Whether the trial court's order permitting secondary evidence was properly set aside by the High Court

Ratio Decidendi

The trial court correctly allowed secondary evidence after all reasonable efforts were made to locate the original; compliance with Section 65 of the Evidence Act was established. The High Court erred in setting aside this order. The mere fact that some signatures on documents were not legible is not sufficient to reject secondary evidence. Admission of secondary evidence does not dispense with proof; genuineness and correctness must be established during trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of High Court set aside
  • Trial court's permission to lead secondary evidence restored