Plaintiffs sought to receive a compact disk of conversations with the defendant under Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC during trial. The trial court dismissed the application; this revision challenged that order. The High Court dismissed the revision, holding electronic evidence without a Section 65B certificate is inadmissible.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.R.P.No.5091 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.12.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C.R.P.No.5091 of 2024 and
C.M.P.No.28519 of 2024
1.Chinnappa
2.S.Venkataramani ... Petitioners
Vs.
Thirupathy ... Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to allow the CRP and set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 14.10.2024 made in I.A.No.07 of 2023 in O.S.No.162 of 2019 passed by the Principal Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri.
For Petitioner : Ms.S.Ambika
O R D E R
This civil revision petition challenges the order of the learned
Principal Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri, passed in I.A.No.07 of 2023 in O.S.No.162 of 2019, dated 14.10.2024.
1 of 6
C.R.P.No.5091 of 2024
2.O.S.No.162 of 2019 is a suit for the following reliefs,
a) cancelling the Deed No.2827/2016 registered on the file of Sub
Registrar, Kaveripattinam on 14.10.2015 standing in the name of defendant,
b) granting an order of permanent injunction restraining the defendant
from alienating or encumbering the suit schedule mentioned property in favour of any third parties, in any manner whatsoever,
c) granting an order of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of
the suit schedule mentioned property in any manner whatsoever.
3.A detailed written statement together with a counter-claim
restraining the plaintiffs from interfering with the peaceful possession and the enjoyment of the property, has also been presented by the defendant. Parties went for trial, PW1 to PW3 have been examined. The suit is posted for continuation of cross examination of PW3.
2 of 6
C.R.P.No.5091 of 2024
4.At that stage, an application was filed in I.A.No.7 of 2023 invoking Order VII Rule 14(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure to receive a compact disk containing the conversation between the defendant and PW3 on various dates was presented in the suit. The plaintiffs pleaded that if this document is received, it will help the Court in coming to a just conclusion in the suit. A counter was filed to the said application by the defendant. He pointed out that the mandatory requirements of Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act had not been complied with in the present case. Apart from that, he also pointed out that in terms of the Indian Evidence Act, even if there were admissions, it is not conclusive, but would operate only as an estoppel.
6.I heard Ms.S.Ambika.
3 of 6
C.R.P.No.5091 of 2024
9.No amount of evidence can be considered unless and until there is a specific plea to that effect. Secondly, the compact disk, being a recording of the conversation, said to have taken place between PW3 and the defendant, it necessarily requires certification under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. The primary evidence being the device, which was used to record the conversation not having been produced before the Court, it is necessary to have a certificate under Section 65B.
4 of 6
C.R.P.No.5091 of 2024
11.That being the position, I do not find any reason to take a different view than the one taken by the learned Principal Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri. Accordingly, the civil revision petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
sli 20.12.2024 Internet:Yes Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order NCC: Yes/No
5 of 6
C.R.P.No.5091 of 2024
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J.
sli
To:
The Principal Subordinate Court, Krishnagiri.
C.R.P.No.5091 of 2024
20.12.2024
6 of 6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a compact disk of recorded conversations could be received at trial under Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC without a Section 65B Evidence Act certificate.
Whether the trial court rightly dismissed the application to receive electronic evidence lacking certification and details of recording.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Chinnappa
S.Venkataramani
Thirupathy
V.Lakshminarayanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
