Dhariwal v. M.S.S. Food Products7 .) However, the secondary evidence of an ordinary document is admissible only and only when the party desirous of admitting it has proved before the court that it was not in his possession or control of it and further, that he has done what could be done to procure the production of it. Thus, the party has to account for the nonproduction in one of the ways indicated in the section. The party further has to lay down the factual foundation to establish the right to give secondary evidence where the original document cannot be produced. When the party gives in evidence a certified copy/secondary evidence without proving the circumstances entitling him to give secondary evidence, the opposite party must raise an objection at the time of admission. In case, an objection is not raised at that point of time, it is precluded from being raised at a belated stage. Further, mere admission of a document in evidence does not amount to its proof. Nor mere marking of exhibit on a document does not dispense with its proof, which is otherwise required to be done in accordance with law. (Vide Roman Catholic Mission v. State of Madras (supra), Marwari Khumhar v. Bhagwanpuri Guru Ganeshpuri8 , R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder v. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami and V.P. Temple9 , Dayamathi Bai v. K.M. Shaffi10 and LIC v. Rampal Singh Bisen (supra).)”
