Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.34 seconds)Section 7 in THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015 [Entire Act]
THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015
Malay Kumar Ganguly vs Sukumar Mukherjee & Ors on 7 August, 2009
20. An expert is not a witness of fact and his evidence is really of an
advisory character. The duty of an expert witness is to furnish the
Judge with the necessary scientific criteria for testing the accuracy of
the conclusions so as to enable the Judge to form his independent
judgment by the application of these criteria to the facts proved by the
evidence of the case. The scientific opinion evidence, if intelligible,
convincing and tested becomes a factor and often an important factor
for consideration along with other evidence of the case. The credibility
of such a witness depends on the reasons stated in support of his
conclusions and the data and material furnished which form the basis
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CS(COMM) 692/2021 & CS(COMM) 707/2021 Page 29 of 35
By:AMAN UNIYAL
Signing Date:14.10.2024
17:47:56
of his conclusions. (See Malay Kumar Ganguly v. Dr. Sukumar
Mukherjee [(2009) 9 SCC 221 : (2009) 10 Scale 675] , SCC p. 249, para
State Of Maharashtra vs Damu S/O Gopinath Shinde And Others on 1 May, 2000
In the said
judgment, it was held that the defendant had not been able to justify the
filing of the additional documents, after the plaintiffs' evidence had been
concluded. The documents sought to be brought on record were in the
possession of the defendants prior to commencement of the plaintiffs'
evidence. Thus, it was held that the trial cannot be interdicted at that stage.
However, in the present case, the position is totally different. The plaintiffs
have established reasonable cause for filing of the additional documents.
Bipin Shantilal Panchal vs State Of Gujarat And Anr on 22 February, 2001
12. It is however noticed that in a large number of affidavits, which are
filed and tendered as examination-in-chief, documents are attached
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CS(COMM) 692/2021 & CS(COMM) 707/2021 Page 32 of 35
By:AMAN UNIYAL
Signing Date:14.10.2024
17:47:56
with the said affidavits. The said documents, so long as they are within
the pleadings or relate to developments subsequent to the filing of the
suit or at the stage of admission/denial, ought not to be refused even if
filed with the affidavit-in-evidence, in as much as at the time of
preparation of evidence, it is usual for witnesses to trace out documents
in support of their testimony and attach the same. This happens not
just with expert witnesses but also with witnesses who appear on behalf
of the parties. The reason for this is not far to seek. The CPC, though
prescribes a schedule for filing of documents, the consistent view of the
Supreme Court and this Court has been that if the documents are
relevant, the same are not rejected. This can be seen from a perusal of
the following judgments, Bipin Shantilal Panchal v. State of
Gujarat (supra), where the Supreme Court observed as under:
1