Petitioner challenged the Family Court order refusing admission of call details of wife. Court disposed petition directing filing of application under Section 65-B Evidence Act if conditions satisfied after hearing parties.
Petition disposed; observation made that application under Section 65-B Evidence Act to be filed if conditions are satisfied.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 15488 of 2022
Narayan Sethi
Petitioner
Mr.Rabindranath Prusty, Advocate
-versus-
Ritika Behera and another
…. Opp. Parties
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA ORDER
Order No.
28.07.2022
Page 1 of 2
// 2 //
Petitioner moves learned Judge, Family Court, Parlakhemundi, Gajapati by filing an application under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act, 1872 to accept call details of his wife.
s.s.satapathy
Issue urgent certified copy of the order on proper
application
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to produce call details of his wife as evidence under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Narayan Sethi
Ritika Behera
Another
K.R. Mohapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
