SAREGAMA INDIA LIMITED Vs. RITESH SIDHWANI & 5 OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Saregama India Limited
Ritesh Sidhwani And 5 Others
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) This is the 5th Defendant's Chamber Summons for leave to lead secondary evidence to prove certain documents. Such a Chamber Summons, it is well settled, is not maintainable.
(2.) In Indian Overseas Bank v Trioka Textile Industries and Ors., 2007 AIR(Bom) 24 Summons is unnecessary, and is misconceived. It is neither necessary nor desirable. It is always open to the party to lead secondary evidence before the Judge recording evidence or hearing the matter without having to file such an application. He said:
2. A party desiring to lead secondary evidence must do so before the Judge recording the evidence. It is the Judge recording evidence who must decide, if any objection as raised, whether or not to admit the secondary evidence in evidence. If evidence is led before a Commissioner the objection to secondary evidence naturally can only be recorded and not decided by the Commissioner. It is then the Judge hearing the suit who decides the objection.
(3.) Therefore, if the 5th Defendant seeks to prove any documents in evidence and cannot do so by primary or direct evidence, he is always at liberty under the provisions of the Evidence Act to lead secondary evidence at the trial. No separate leave in a Chamber Summons is necessary or appropriate for this purpose.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.