LawRato

Signed carbon copy of original document can be relied as evidence: SC

October 30, 2019


A signed carbon copy of the original document can be relied upon as evidence, stated the Supreme Court in a judgment. While pronouncing the order, the SC has maintained that a carbon copy submitted as evidence in this form is admissible as a piece of primary evidence under section 62 of the Indian Evidence Act. The Court was dealing with an appeal against an order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in which the HC had rejected the carbon copy as evidence in a land dispute matter. In its order, the HC had stated that the carbon copy of a document signed by both the parties cannot be accepted as an original document in terms of section 62 of the Indian Evidence Act. However, the Supreme Court, while setting aside the order of the High Court has stated that the finding of the HC is incorrect and against the said section of the Indian Evidence Act as the copy was made in the same process as the original document. Moreover, it has stated that once the document has been signed by both parties it assumes the character of the original document. The SC also pointed out towards an explanatory provision under section 62 that talked about copying and printing from the original document. Based on these observations, the SC has sent the matter back to the High Court to adjudicate the matter afresh admitting the signed carbon copy as valid evidence.


 

Latest Legal News


Supreme Court’s Verdict on the Same-Sex Marriage; No Fundamental Right to Marry
3 Bills to Renew India's Criminal Justice System presented in Lok Sabha; All you Need to Know
Data Protection Bill Passed by the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha; Decoding the DPDP Bill
High Court; Denying Physical Intimacy to Wife not Cruelty under IPC
PoSH Act Implementation
‘Sorry state of affairs' in PoSH Act implementation; SC orders Govts. to ensure ICCs are constituted
Widow can't inherit Property if Husband did not own it: Punjab & Haryana HC
Widow can't inherit Property if Husband did not own it: Punjab & Haryana HC