Secondary evidence does not match the primary evidence
Sonia Prabhu
(Querist) 26 May 2012
This query is : Resolved
Background :
The Plaintiff has filed two civil suits: Small Causes Court and Special Civil Suit.
He has submitted the Original Assignment Deed made by him in the Small Causes Court and in the Special Civil Suit he has submitted a fresh registered copy of assignment deed as Secondary Evidence ( This is not the photocopy of the original one)
Facts:
In the Special Civil Suit he claims the property on the grounds that he is the owner and as a proof of his ownership he has submitted the Secondary Evidence of the Assignment Deed ( registered copy of the deed and not photocopy of the original deed).
On comparing the Secondary evidence with the Original deed it was found that the original deed contains some cancellation in excess stamp duty ( around 6 lakhs refund)and a stamp endorsed by the Collector ( this page is not stamped by the registrar of Havell i). This transaction and the endorsed stamp of the Collector is missing in the Secondary Evidence although it is a registered copy from the Havelli.
Note:
In both the suits the Plaintiff has not submitted the Index II of the property which contains the remark from the Collector about the transaction and refund of money. And mentioning that the plaintiff had made an application for the refund.
But in both these cases the Defendant has submitted this Index II.
In My view:
As the entire Special Civil Suit is based on the grounds of the ownership of the plaintiff and that is relied only on the Secondary evidence and since the Secondary evidence does not match the Primary evidence hence this Secondary evidence be challenged and this case will not stand as the Secondary evidence is not valid.
Question :
Can this Secondary evidence be challenged in order to achieve this goal ?
Nadeem Qureshi
(Expert) 26 May 2012
yes, Secondary Evidence can be challenge
Dr V. Nageswara Rao
(Expert) 27 May 2012
1. S. 77 of Evidence Act says that the certified copies given under S. 76 "may be produced in proof of the oublic documents" or parts thereof.Certified copy of even private document is a public document under S. 76.
2. S. 79 says that the Court "shall presume" that the certified copy is genuine.There is no presumption as to the truthfulness of the contents.
3. As S. 79 employs "shall presume", you can prove that it is not correct copy of the original by the production of the original if you have the original.If the other party has the original, give him notice to produce under S. 66, and if he does not produce, you are entitiled to leasd to secondary evidence under S. 65.
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 28 May 2012
Secondary evidence can be challanged by calling the relevant records.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
Sonia Prabhu
(Querist) 29 May 2012
Thanks for the information. This is just to brief you experts as per what next step has been taken in this matter.
I have got the certified copy of the Primary evidence from the Small Causes Court and I am submitting it in the Special Civil Suit. So that for the final argument I an present a direct comparison.
Can anyone guide me with any relevant citations that could be supportive.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 19 November 2012
I appreciate your efforts fighting Tenant Eviction case on your own.
I understand, you denied the Landlord Tenants Relationship in RAE suit, and it is Fatal for you.
Why don't you try Amendment of your Written Statement , accepting him as Landlord, with ground of his not informing you he is Landlord, and that He never issued any rent receipt, and that u r always ready to pay your rent, and ready to accept any purchaser of property as your Landlord.
Genuine mistake, coupled with negligence on part of Plaintiff to inform you, will be considered.
As far as Doc Evidence act is concerned, If u want to prove, He is not the owner, on basis of the dereference of Doc relied in two different courts, It should be proved beyond any reasonable doubt.
