Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.23 seconds)Section 19 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 24 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Anvar P.V vs P.K.Basheer & Ors on 18 September, 2014
Mr.Seksaria then
11/25
arbp1225.2012.odt
placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in Anvar P.V. (supra)
and relied upon the observations of the Court in paragraph 17 and
submitted that only if the electronic record is duly produced in terms of
Section 65-B of the Evidence Act, would the question arise as to genuineness
thereof and reference can be made to Section 45-A, opinion of Examiner of
Electronic Evidence. The Evidence Act does not contemplate or permit proof
of an electronic record by oral evidence, if the provisions under Section 65-B
of the Evidence Act are not complied with. The Supreme Court further held
that proof of electronic record is object to a special provision introduced by
the Information Technology Act. Section 65-A read with Sections 59 and
65-B are sufficient to hold that the special provisions of evidence relating to
the electronic record shall be governed by the procedure prescribed under
Section 65-B of the Evidence Act. That is a complete code in itself. Being a
special law, the general law under Section 63 and Section 65 would yield to
the specific provision. Mr.Seksaria submitted that in the present case several
items and documents were sought to be introduced into evidence such as
electronic mails which had not been proved. He therefore submitted that
standard of proof adopted by the arbitral tribunal was unacceptable.
Wazir Chand Karam Chand vs Union Of India And Anr. on 4 November, 1988
Wazir Chand (supra) also holds that accepting evidence behind the
back of a party was held to be legal misconduct on the part of the arbitrator.
Ameer Trading Corporation Ltd vs Shapoorji Data Processing Ltd on 18 November, 2003
17. On the second question it was held that the objection to the
admissibility or relevancy of evidence contained in the affidavit of evidence
can be admitted at any stage reserving its resolution until final judgment, as
held in the case of Ameer Trading Corporation Ltd. vs. Shapoorji Data
Processing Ltd. (2004) 1 SCC 702 . Mr.Seksaria therefore submitted that in
the facts and circumstances of present case admissibility of the documents
itself was called into question and has not been decided.