Skip to content


Kunneth Odangat Kalandan Vs. Vayoth Palliyal Kunhunni Kidavu and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1883)ILR6Mad80
AppellantKunneth Odangat Kalandan
RespondentVayoth Palliyal Kunhunni Kidavu and ors.
Excerpt:
evidence act, section 65, clause (f) - secondary evidence of destroyed record--certified copy not essential. - .....on any other ground, and we must dismiss the appeal with.....
Judgment:

Innes and Kindersley, JJ.

1. It appears to us that the original of the plaint having been destroyed, it was open to the Court to admit secondary evidence of the document by a production of an uncertified copy.

2. We think the clause of Section 65 of the Evidence Act, which provides that 'In case (e) or (f), a certified copy of the document, but no other kind of secondary evidence, is admissible,' applies to the case in which the public document is still in existence on the public records, and is a provision intended rather to protect the originals of public records from the danger to which they would be exposed by constant production in evidence, than to interfere with the general rule of evidence given in Clause (c) of the same section that secondary evidence may be given when the original has been destroyed or lost. Evidence was taken to ascertain that the plaint was a true copy of the original, and there seems, therefore, to be no substantial ground for the objection to the admissibility of these documents. No objection was taken to the decree on any other ground, and we must dismiss the appeal with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //