MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Document Presented During Cross Examination Must Be Placed On Judicial File: Delhi HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Delhi High Court has ruled that if a document produced during cross-examination of a witness is admitted or denied by the witness, it cannot be returned and must be placed in the court file.

Justice Mini Pushkarna was reviewing a motion filed by the plaintiffs in the civil suit under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for permission to file additional documents.

During the recording of the testimony of the defendant's witness, the plaintiffs presented the "returned envelope" in front of the witness to verify those addresses, according to the plaintiffs' argument. However, the Local Commissioner refused to acknowledge or record these envelopes.

Thus, the plaintiffs petitioned the High Court for permission to record "returned envelopes" that they had received with return remarks.

It was argued that the 'returned envelopes' were not a new or unexpected document because they pertained to letters or express mail receipts that were already part of the court record. Thus, it was requested on behalf of the plaintiffs that these additional documents be admitted into evidence.

Noting that the speed post receipts related to the 'returned envelopes' were already part of the Court's record, the Court stated that the 'returned envelopes' could not be considered new documents, as other related documents were already on file."

Thus, the envelopes sought to be recorded do not represent a new development or occurrence. In light of this, there would be no prejudice to the defendant if the aforementioned documents were admitted for cross-examination of DW1. In addition, as pointed out by the plaintiffs' counsel, these documents go to the heart of the dispute between the parties, as the defendant intentionally did not receive the notices and letter sent by the plaintiffs via express mail "court stated.

It added to "In accordance with CPC provisions, a document may be introduced/displayed for the first time during cross-examination. If the document produced during cross-examination of a witness is either admitted or denied, the document cannot be returned and must be placed in the court file."

Due to the fact that the envelopes in question were presented to the defendant's witness during the course of testimony, the court granted the application and the "returned envelopes" were entered into evidence.

D.D:08-07-2022

BHAG SINGH GAMBHIR AND ORS VersusRAMA ARORA

Latest Legal News