Mark vs exhibit in dv case

As per the rules of evidence all marked documents or objects are authenticated but all exhibit are not authenticated, and marked documents will prevail over exhibit. 

Originally posted by : N.K.Assumi
	As per the rules of evidence all marked documents or objects are authenticated but all exhibit are not authenticated, and marked documents will prevail over exhibit.

 

 

Sachin, yes I agree with you, but let me also put it in this way.There can not be marking without exhibit, and there can not be exhibit unless it is marked by admissiable rule of evidence known as authentication or identifying the objects.Mere production of Ex-1, Ex-2 etc and marking of a documents as an exhibit by the court cannot amount to proof. Exhibit has to be proved by admissiable rule of evidence, thereafter it is marked and attest by the judge and form part of evidence on records as exhibit. 

Certified copy of the sale deed registered with the sub-registrar is secondary evidence that can given u/s 65 (e) if the Evidence Act, as the original is a public document within the meaing of section 74 ot the Act.

The court by all means has to take due cognizance of the said document which may have been marked not exhibited.

The usual manner for exhibiting any document is be summoning the original record from the person or public office where it is being kept or its true copy kept as in the present case, original registered sale deed of the property is with the buyer but its true copy is kept in the Sub-registrar office.

In order to exhibit the said certified copy of the sale deed your advocate should have got the original record of the sub-registrar summoned or summoned the buyer of the property having original registered sale deed to bring it in the court and got this certified copy of the sale deed exhibited and as this was not done the court marked not exhibited it.

Dear Quriest,

Your intention behind filing of the document because your wife was praying for right to reside in that flat. Right to reside can be claimed where you are residing presently not necessarily in that flat only. 

Yes, not only in that house but even if you're unable to keep her at that house, get another one at your cost, even if has to be taken on rent, you will bear the rent. Also provide other household facilities those are required and which she was enjoying when living with you at matrimonial home. Heavy cost you may have to pay.

Dear experts,

Thanks for all the inputs. Yes I do understand that she can claim RTR in another place as well and I think have points to counter that if/when such a claim is made.

I have one more question - in order to exhibit the sale deed, do I need to summon the concerned sub-registrar as witness to produce the required certified copy OR can I just summon the certified copy to be sent by the Sub-registrar through post to the court? If the latter is an option, please let me known under what sections  can this be done?

 

Regards,

Amar