Sampath Kumar B N vs Rahimunissa Begum on 28 June, 2010

[Cites 0, Cited by 2]
Karnataka High Court

Sampath Kumar B N vs Rahimunissa Begum on 28 June, 2010

Equivalent citations: 2010 (4) AIR KAR R 316

Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri

Bench: Ashok B.Hinchigeri

1

 

in Tim HIGH CQURT my KARKATAKA AT Bamggigzﬁsi %

DATED mxs THE mm my 012' JUH2  1?]   : 

BEFGRE 

THE HONYBLE mm. JUSTICE .AsH <3:{'z=3. Hxismxéirc'-E%.1:ﬁ"%V% 

WRIT PETITIOR NO.25912'*§F 2c>o*3%%§<;:22;12:é;§¢}

B.N.8aA%£PA'I'E KUEAR '- _ .
SIOYEEATARAIAN  "
AGED mom 51'a'*E5'R3  

RJAT snap A;:s3::1zE«53$--.'_ ~  _ _  
13:30::-2 He.B'rM 45:9;   .    V'
"'l.'€A.TARA.IA CQLE   ~  
 14     pmrrxuma

 '  (BY  ADV, FOR
-   "'M'!S..K§¥MAR&KUMAR}

D'! OM65'-.§£mED. aamrng am
RIAT Em ﬂ~::1::z M», EAVH} ROAB

   55:31 14  agsmmnm

 X T " '(BY SRITRIMUR'1'HY,ADV., mg
A SR: K s 133861, AI}V.,}

 13$ WEI? FE'1TI'O1i $ FILED {SHEER ﬁR'£'ICL% 23$ AIID

   :33' 'mm comnmnca 01? mm rmms TD swam
  ;:.31mE1=a: Damn oa.e'z.e9 mssxn mi e.s.1st<:>.;9:;2sss as man
' FILE 0;? seam' 01? cm JUBGE ($2.33.; as m. am-'C: AT

K.G.}?., AT AHKEXURE-E TI) WE W131'? Pﬂﬁﬁﬂﬁ A1?!) ETG.

THI8 PETHIOH CG%*IG OH FGR PREL 
Hwiﬂﬁ B? 'B' GRGU? THIS DAY, THE G933? EADE THE
FC¥LLGWﬂ'3G:



2
CIRQEB

The petmezm has mm 'thc chanme 

crder, datnzi 6."i'.2ﬁ ( E) passed   

ef the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and   & '

o.Es.xo,191;2ces. L  

2. me facts at tltm  met 
peti*5wnex* ﬁled the suit;  rmndmt 
the relief of apetziﬁc     ,
dated 19.6.1§89*ﬂ f_'In  me.»

 prmd' 4'  <3:-py of the aﬁdavit
stating   ef an  t of sale

..  Kai Bab in fawur of km

:_"C§:iTt!;e Trial Ccsurt wrmmg thc permission

 up  ta mark the said mm.» copy as an

.  . '_   @313 . pctitiaon in ﬁlaﬁ.

V'  Ms.Ujwala, the Eaarﬁ munsel appearing ﬁar

VT  and Kxﬂ far the peﬁﬁorm submits that

 oziggml mgzavia: which imelf is by way czf ash

 t, was in the pmamsien ef the said Abdul

Rum Saba. Tim  retahxwd the. xercsx acapry of



3

the aaﬁ aﬁﬁavit. Sim submits that the Trial Court 

bk inm anmwar by réxlsmgj  " ' m 

docummt in evittlanoe an rim gmumi that $123  

in Int alive. She farm submim 1:3:::At'thg_   L

eomgﬁed with the raquirmzsgxt   

respoﬁant an xmtitze in the    
Rake I6 <21' <3.P.c:. Qnly e>:;t1ze%rai1:z;~e§k'Az:§«t1smuspo§admt
m ptrodum the uﬁal   :~equmted

the Trial com   swzmdary

 "    evuienc' :5: can
be   of tits: apposite:
party.  » 'LAI'1'1:a1*€s§o x  aE:e'..'..aubmm' that thaws is no

 Tﬁaxf  dawn the petzitianm-*3 request

 cf the max wﬁy. In support;

2  pf suﬁmiﬁﬁinmg she relzea' an thk Courtk (3% ion

  of cmrmsas @ sen': GAFAR am as.

 Aﬁhleim}. rem-sea in1LR 2006 mg 159. The

'T  wragaphs nf Tim saiﬂ decisisn are axtracwd

9»  U he1'ei:1ha%:----

"5. G®srVafﬁwm&m ;m,
1872 ﬁorﬁwzt 'the A.¢:t'é&t.zIs wﬂh magi

EH.



 

ﬁr

eviderxw. mm 6} arms Act deals wﬁh .
cmms q . {D23 wﬁxrzts af  '5   
may be pmwd am? by priwmrg er  . _
zzzi&rm. Prinmagg azsiﬁm   .   I
itsevpmmearor mama' arias    T"
the madam   
eengseamws afpumac  

mm the 02:32:91 by 

in themswaes  n}-}'me com

and mp3'.es'   copies
mwﬁegfxaﬂi.-2:__ as  arm parties
    amowﬁs bf ma

 s%*¥ér= by W vemn

  .3 £$ clear as :1 rate

   by primary evidencse.
mmmam is mi awiiiable mr me

_ - aikt'in"sewimx 55 gyms Ad only then
  is adrrﬁsﬁhiew zrramfaw,
 _  ezédam is amma, a paper
 to be medybr not pmdzasing the

 euideaw. my after me rm:  of

 "   e::i% is saeziwy manage:
 zrwmzdazyemaenwwmgat beperrnitteéﬁa
? headmweg

a) 6. Apaztysatfmrpmmecirzwis

not mam ta ﬁts mg; apyﬁezzizbn

 ﬂmmmmpemﬂﬁmmEad

ﬁw eﬁ®rm.AH3mw@dw
HRH



5
ofiumtstsatepfrﬁaﬂwwtmessbaxaxzd

Ieadeviﬁrm.-aa1z':1go':x£ the ﬁ  
zmmr whiz}: he is mate to pmmm 
prsmzg ezaiwwm. gm am: is  
from stack em'&% arm 3 mm is  
jbrpmdtmim ofwca.:.~y'"'e:»::¢eg:;a;e, _A£éf&;2§g2 V:   é
perm #16' party to  é  =x  

evzfdarm sumac:   a;

me Aﬁ. riawexrer,    "

granted to the. panyi-{.9-.'¢am" £12:-.l&r;$i
madman;   in the
opposite  t~'ie%1sé%¢-éwaﬁm of
    event

 20 tm  aeagcse me mentions

  mm affine am an

1' V  rrze}:'.':sf.  3?: the evem was ayem is upheia'
  W 1%,. .....  E ma, mg whim,"
  in zema tsftlm szdd mczmwrzts
"   ignored wraze amasmg the case an
  gm azgfmn £9 over-32:22:22 me
~  t.m£¢z' aamm mzdthe wdence gm 2::
 reqnmoyzéaesamaacwxwmscanaemmz

we xzatnsiérrztiotz mm  0ftm
aa.seo§1men£s.Eu:,a:t£?eegrmmaY£f%atthe
pariyw§mp:%s£a addu:::s%mry
eziiﬁww Ins not aﬁscbsed from where,
wM$m¢mr&y?$gmﬂw md
wfﬁr the mid wcwﬁ are csomfng

ﬁ0m£:p:9;::serc:;stm,£?sec$;1cwWw:2wE
R811



8

repmmntativm of Abdul Karw Sab or taca>_'_'

rasvpﬂmlent under Sectian 6% of the Izzdzé  

Act, 1372. He ocsrmsrasds that    

evidarﬁce 78 permzuk sibie tmly if 

iasuing the nomaica undar .66  
mmpkd with. The    the
mumee at mm as   11 Rule: 16
61' c.1=.c. am     as required
umm:    Evidazrwe Act. Hc
'   said provisions af
c.P.c. i.a~§:r as prodt.1<>m,g the ox-:g'm1
   sf the apposite gmrty.

  the defendant hag dmued' the

      amdavit, thc quwticzn sf oompIy1ng'

 _w-i1iA1"t;*<1e  under Order 11 Rule 16 of{I.P.{3.

'  me; at all. Ha further ham to: my naﬁae

  in than pzlaint, the petﬁnm has atatw

VT  the oﬁgnal aﬂciavit *3 En the pessassian of the

fiBH.



9

7. sri Trimurthy has raliad. an thc 

Suprem Court's ciaeiskraxz in the cam cf SITES;  

sam RAM mm CJTHERS,   A

am,w1m--eans.1; is held that   

lam ﬁar the rmpsmn cf the   
mm Em 'm the judméiit cxf   ease
cf THE ROMAE Xcxrzamgc, Tma swarm
oz? MADRAS  AIR 1966 Sc

1457, regm tmw I It is held mam

that   am mt admissibha in

evidexme,    for the eatablishwt

 of  to  widamze.

  in the me at' BBAMQHAHDRA

 v. mama TELEHIGNE mmusmms Lxmmm, BY

 AND mrmztmm amgcma Arm

  repurmd in 11,12 mm mm 2m.1. In the am

  ~ <:a3e, this Ccaurt has takw. tha mmisdmmzi View that

mama pzuductﬁzn of photacapim dc: mt amnum; to pmmf

eftlweamuniwa tlmméaygvmxincvidmzccis sham:
BIL



11

11. My puusal af ﬁlm plain: dfmclxases that mm:

$5 rm avwmnt that the arﬁxml aﬁdavit is 

possaasion of the rwpondcnt. The last  

Pﬁrﬁﬁﬁﬁh 5 oftiw Phint ﬁnds am ",  "

dacwzwrzt is pmma  £fu:r;"'.9'gz*Za::41_' 
Iﬁzrawm my wmvmd  oj'.;=;¢*f§;~  M
12. Furtlmr, mwiaére ma firm max

soapy in  that it is coznpmed
with thé'. ¢m1a1%' '  ' 85   i  % im xerox °9PY« Thﬁ
time' 5:31; 63f' High Court in the case of

 " Rz&J2$§'1'3?sE% ;3eL';3E:¢'rRANsPmT cawmv v. LE3.

*9?  mam 1993 RAJASTHAH 153,

  is ¢£&.;'mm. %%a%mmmm. 1: has held tlmt if m n£.':t1r:e'

  tha witnms ta produce the dacrumtmt in

A    axﬁ if tlmre ?n m @m1a.1' ta ahsw ﬂmt the

  _4"Vph:§>tc»atat caopy was made fmm im srﬁginai, the ardar

  the mrty ta madame the said mpy is mt

'°'°P°" nan.



12

13. It is alga theta;-Awcrtlly ﬁrm: Abdul 

was alive' £9: about 12 ywrs aﬁer the atahaci    I

the amdavit. me suit is mt ma wrm   

T? 13 Km way the %1;tE'«'-IVE  

the xerox mpg an 51:3   
dispute that the pen*tim;':.~:;j_   130
the mm mprwmtaﬁvfﬁé   89.35: to
muduce the      the copy in
quwticn is   In this ﬁarcl,
the Apeg   ¢£  ;£~NfP.J.YASHODA v.

sm.K.sH2}Bi1a  in. AIR 200? as 1721,

has   tlié saw' rim: Wham mere is m

  nt beﬁflg tmmpawd wn:h' the

  campy Gamma'. be smcsptecl an

 

    33 beta by the Apia: Ceurt in the me of

  (asap-a), mm the mu-m1anien for produc1ng'

adﬁibk in esrmexm. A plain rcadﬁg csf the plain':

6% not aim that the gmtitianer Ems sxhmzated all the

l



15
ﬁistiae to pmmacse in party in whom mmswmt 

16. It is also Womxwlﬁk to refer ts  

at' the Qrissa. High Czzurt m 

<::.:-Iarmaa Pammx v. "m 9" 

reportasi in Am 19:73 c3mss:£fa5, hem
that, if the grrigina}. 5»   92'   intiﬁ',
ma awomimy and' «arm  m  nmiszas
under Sazrtion   it is Ensuedg
the iasumﬁ ' ._ * 4' {xi  Sectm' 11 65 0f the: sad

Act is *4%_§"mx§;'  Smrular" ":M"' ly, the Divisiun mush cf

    the case of NHYAHANBA ROY

  rapartaad in Am 1953 CALCU'T"1'A

  say:-

.. " '=-gmémmtésammemmy aesirmgzo rnaice use
A'  af  euiasaswenwg, mtheﬁm mm,
serve <1 mace mm the party in whose
pamﬂmﬁmeﬁwm may he, wquﬁmghimto
pmcitm rm ariyhal llfkd it is only whsn such
zwtiwisrwtmcgziiedioﬁlzmtzttfaszigizttogiza

%zdm'yez::'w*:ma:*'i.ws\ 'ﬂwmamwrtairx
ﬁ8H.

 



15

exzsapam is the ﬂzie Eﬁd mas: in 3,56; ma it is 

pegremy dear am 2w*s3 ﬁg ﬁfwm appgzfgs £3 
pwwnt mare, i is wzdty cistzkfram mg     -1~ 

mm rm rwﬁzras -infmrg Iarizri' was am? mnégyszia 

pe ' ' rt mzfmrse & ,:éé,"ﬁ¥fQ§§w;s§fg¢g    A
we when mg 3}" 33%   

Ex. 1, 339$? bemw aénﬁg-é-zafgie  'E3  
far as me mama is wmgzwzzm "$5 
mass-mgam Ex. 1, it,----£§  * - 

 

1?. As     $33 12:: what:
etxeleavourai. 52$    ta mamh the
 baa mt said in
wime   a§®'s;it im Eyizzg as an

natigeg _§1:1ci;&:  5i' ﬁx: Eﬁciiazi Eviéenm: Asa,

 3&1 mrmeniaﬁxraa {xi the

  $a'b are aim mt ya': an mﬁce,

$3  évament. it; the phiné: ﬁmi tbs xerax mg};

  the ::§frgz'na1 $2' is mmgared. with me

   mad as there is m mssibiﬁty sf 21% xermc mp}:

   wmgareci with {ha omgaé, the Tréai §:mri:'s archer

 atamismg the La. is absais.2.'£&Iy upEm2§a'5§:a and it 53

a.mv:>r%g1y zxpheisﬁg Carmiéeréng gm Egg arﬁ factuai

matr7ms3ftE1i3c;a;sae§amama:m}r3§rasf§§:aea$.&av£tiz1

Ell



 

1"?

quwirian might}: be pcrmitmﬁ is 'ac magkaﬁ in 
at aﬁ. ﬁe faunéaﬁnza whaisaemr is  

wtablimhmmt af me right ta gim $$j§C32'1€iﬁ£?'f?'  3  "  

18. Far ail tbs afazwégiﬁi.  

d'mmis3w&. Kt: ardez' 3%  ma'$_._L: 

    .....
Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court

Sampath Kumar B N vs Rahimunissa Begum on 28 June, 2010

Equivalent citations: 2010 (4) AIR KAR R 316

Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri

Bench: Ashok B.Hinchigeri
