Opinion on evidence act 65b for e-mail attestation by company
shakeel
(Querist) 15 August 2013
This query is : Resolved
Request for expert’s opinion on evidence act 65B:-
I gave notarized G. P.A and handed over all original documents in 2007 for exchange of property to my co-brother as I am staying in abroad. He let out the site on rent and signed agreement on my behalf as holding G.P.A. In my visit to India in Jan’2008, my co-brother didn’t buy any property in my name. I had discussed with co-brother to return all documents along with G.P.A.(didn’t proceed to cancel G.P.A as per cancellation procedure) he agreed for that and I have transferred the property in my wife’s name on 28th January 2008 to take care and informed to tenant. Tenant agreed to pay rent to us since 1st Feb’2008. He agreed to pay rent even in mails also. Several e-mail communications were done with tenant for the payment of rent, in mails he agreed, but didn’t pay rent. We have communicated through company mails (Tenant works with X company, I was working with Y company). Mean time my wife didn’t apply for khata transfer immediately as we are not aware much. My co-brother takes the advantage of notarized G.P.A and transfers the property on his wife’s name on 31st March 2008 and obtains khata in his wife’s name (as E.C clearly indicates the transfer of property by the owner on 28th Jan, 2008 and second transfer by GPA on 31 March, 2008 by which GPA got ceased by change of ownership. We applied for Khata in Jan’2009. We came to know that khata has been issued in the name of my co-brother’s wife. We filed a petition to the D.C to revoke their khata. We filed a case against the tenant in 2009 for ejectment and rental recovery. In 2010 Tenant and my co-brother collided and by suppressing the facts, co-brother filed a case against tenant in another court based on khata / sale deed and got the decree from the other court as possession holder by ejectment of tenant, as the tenant didn’t notify regarding this case in our rental recovery case and they suppressed the facts. Recently 2 months back we filed a case against my co-brother for deed declaration (notices are under issuance)
In our 2009 rental recovery / ejectment case, judge is asking for our relationship with the tenant (rental agreement between us) and judge also indicating that at present position is not with us and e-mails are not admissible. we informed that agreement done by my GPA holder. For e-mail communications, our lawyer says, as per evidence act 65B e-mails are admissible. communicated mails to be certified by the company. Tenant already left his company as well as Bangalore itself. Is it a mandatory requirement to get mails certified? (if it has communicated through personnel mails, what to do?). Will his company allow me to enter and respond me to get these mails attested? Are there any regulations that company should attest the personnel communicated mail?
Your valuable suggestion in this regard is highly appreciated.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 16 August 2013
The e-mails are not required to be certified if it fulfills the provisions of the 65B. The print out of the e-mail is admissible in evidence.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 16 August 2013
Print of e mails are admissible in evidence. There is no need of attestation of its hard copies.
