Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.28 seconds)Anvar P.V vs P.K.Basheer & Ors on 18 September, 2014
In view of above, view of the Court is that it is said that Certificate
given Ex. PW1/F does not fulfill the prerequisites condition as observed in case
BHARAT BHUSHAN HARMILAPI VS. ALCHEMIST AIRWAYS PVT. LTD. 12
titled as Anvar P.V vs P.K Basheer & Ors. (2014) 10 SCC 473, Civil Appeal No.
4226/2012.
Section 63 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 65 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 59 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) vs Navjot Sandhu@ Afsan Guru on 4 August, 2005
It was also held that Section 63 and 65 of The Indian Evidence Act
have no application in the case of secondary evidence by way of electronic record;
the same is wholly governed by Sections 65A and 65B of The Indian Evidence Act,
so to that extent, the statement of law on admissibility of secondary evidence
pertaining to electronic record, as stated by the Supreme Court in case of State
(NCT of Delhi) vs. Navjot Sandhu alias Afsan Guru, (2005) 11 SCC 600 does not
lay down the correct legal position, which requires to be overruled and was
accordingly overruled. It was also held that an electronic record by way of
secondary evidence shall not be admitted in evidence unless the requirements
under Section 65B of The Indian Evidence Act are satisfied. It was also held that in
the case of CD, VCD, chip, etc., the same shall be accompanied with the certificate
in terms of Section 65B of The Indian Evidence Act obtained at the time of taking of
document, without which, the secondary evidence pertaining to that electronic
record, is inadmissible.
Section 65 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
1