Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: NM No.782-2019
1 in Sum SU No.6939-2005
MHCC010020252019
IN THE COURT OF JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT
AT GREATER BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 782 OF 2019
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 6939 OF 2005
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited
...Applicant/Org. Plaintiff
Versus
Ramesh Mahadev Priyolker
...Defendant
Appearance :
Ld. advocate Mr. Shailesh More for plaintiff (absent).
Defendant Ramesh Priyolker in person (present).
CORAM :DR. S. D. TAWSHIKAR
C. R. NO. : 61
DATE : 07-12-2022
ORDER
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
Plaintiff has filed the present Notice of Motion seeking
leave to adduce secondary evidence to prove certain documents
detailed in prayer clause(a).
2. Perused Notice of Motion and the affidavit-in-support filed
along with it. Notice of Motion is admittedly filed in February, 2019 and
still pending for the orders. The record shows that defendant till date
-- 1 of 5 --
NM No.782-2019
2 in Sum SU No.6939-2005
has not filed any reply.
3. Considering the short question involved, I find it just and
proper to decide the present Notice of Motion in absence of plaintiff and
in absence of reply.
4. The Hon’ble High Court has held in the case of Karthik
Gangadhar Bhat V/s. Nirmala Namdeo Wagh, decided on 03-11-2017,
that there is no need of any application for leading secondary evidence
but the party in his evidence has to satisfy the Court regarding the proof
of documents by secondary evidence. The Hon’ble Court has further
held that such application is not just unnecessary, but it is misconceived.
5. It is settled position of law that the party willing to adduce
secondary evidence, is no more required to seek permission of the
Court. A party desirous of proving the documents can prove the same by
leading secondary evidence as per the law. Therefore, I find that this
Notice of Motion deserves to be allowed. It is needless to say that
plaintiff will have to prove the documents through secondary evidence
as per the provisions of Evidence Act, 1872. Hence, the order.
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No.782 of 2019 is allowed in terms of prayer
clause (a).
2. Plaintiff is at liberty to adduce secondary evidence as per law.
3. Notice of Motion No.782 of 2019 is disposed of accordingly.
(Dr. S. D. Tawshikar)
Judge, City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai
Date-07-12-2022 Court Room No.61
Dictated on : 07-12-2022
Transcribed on : 07-12-2022
Signed on : 08-12-2022
-- 2 of 5 --
NM No.782-2019
3 in Sum SU No.6939-2005
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
08-12-2022 at 5.50p.m. Mrs. V. V. Malgaonkar
Name of the Judge
(with Court Room No.)
Dr. S.D. Tawshikar
C.R. No.61
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/
ORDER
07-12-2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O. on 08-12-2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 08-12-2022
-- 3 of 5 --
NM No.782-2019
4 in Sum SU No.6939-2005
-- 4 of 5 --
NM No.782-2019
5 in Sum SU No.6939-2005
-- 5 of 5 --