Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Now let me examine each document.

               Remark in Impugned Order.              Marking in
                                                        Evidence
Document No.26:                                     It is a certified

It is a certified copy of Form No. 20B, along with copy of a pub- an annual report. It was issued by the Registrar of lic document. Companies, in 2006.

Vina khadpe 15.08.2019_sr.25.wp.8764.2018 1st draft Document No.31:

Documents No.39: In the absence Photographs said to have been taken by the witness of any nega-

himself.                                           tives, the pho-
                                                   tographs be-
                                                   come       elec-
                                                   tronic      evi-
                                                   dence.



 Vina khadpe                                    15.08.2019_sr.25.wp.8764.2018 1st draft
Document No.43:                                  CCs of Public

Vina khadpe 15.08.2019_sr.25.wp.8764.2018 1st draft Document 37 is the report of the Court Commissioner, along with photographs. This document needs no specific marking for under Order 26, Rule 10(2) of Civil Procedure Code, they "form part of the record."

Document No.39:

A bunch of photographs. PW-1 claims to have taken them. Earlier, marking of photographs faced no problem. Once a negative is produced, that became the primary evidence and the photograph, perhaps, secondary evidence. Now, with filmless cameras and cellular phones, film based photography is pass'e. So the photographs have become mere electronic evidence.

In perspective:

39. To put the issue of marking documents in perspective, I hold that respondent, in fact, may raise objection about the admissibility of the documents. To that extent, their account cannot be found fault with. About the impugned order, I may note that in most instances the trial Court has accepted that PW1 is competent enough to have the Vina khadpe 15.08.2019_sr.25.wp.8764.2018 1st draft documents marked through him. On the other hand, it has however ruled that each document must be marked through the official who has issued it. This may assume importance or relevance vis-à-vis a private document which a party has secured through a public authority under RTI Act--say, a registered deed of sale, a deed of lease, or sub-lease.