in my opinion, the address given in a telephone bill may be relevant but not admissible as an evidence per se....it has to be supported by evidence....a telephone bill is not a public document in terms of S.75 of Indian Evidence Act....so in case the authenticity of address is in question then there has to be supporting evidence in this regard.
verification of address is done both for security and billing purposes, but since all this done through pvt. agencies, so can not be admitted as evidence as such.
under govt. instructions TRAI has framed specific guidelines in this context, for details better search the TRAI website.
The case is of Teritorial Jurisdiction Transfer from one district (South District of Delhi) Court to another district court (South West Delhi) where wife files a address of a place as "residing in' under Memo of party which way back in 2006 and established her jurisdiction to sue husabnd in a HMA case and the memo of Parties address is a Govt. Qtr address where she is not staying neither she is a Govt. servant hence theGovt. Qtr. was never alloted to her nor the original allottee ever declared to his Dept. that wife is living as "relative" or as "tenant" as per definition of Apex Court recent citations per se.
Dte. of Estate / local Police station Tenant verification / Original Qtr. owner statement at DCP office + Original Govt. Allottee Department has stated on record that the Qtr. is not shared by wife and all these have been done via RTI by husband.
However wife owns a cellphone which has address of another District activated since 2005 as well as Election Card in the same State (Delhi) which has been verified from cellphone company / Election Commission of India Office and recent bills are of working cellphone with verified address as per DoT and Advisory Council of Telecom in India (ACT) guidelines of 16th. July 2006.
Hence the respondent / husband files a Trasnfer of Court Petition from one District to another within same State and Delhi before the HC of Delhi.
HC directs the Trial Court to first decide the Teritorial Jurisdiction then any other matter .
Somedays back I asked members here to guide me on S. of CPC to use for taking this metter at Trial Court and members were kind enough to guide me to use S. 9 R/w S. 20 of CPC that I will do on nearest date at Trial Court but my que. now is that the Memo of Parties and Sworn Affidavit of Wife thus is "fraud" as the address is not where she resides given under Oath - right, so will the cellphone address which is in working condition as of today with another district address will be treated as Teritorial Jurisdiction or what ? how the Trial Court will now decide the transfer of suite from one district to another within the State of Delhi based on abv short brief and HC of Delhi directions to trial Court?
I understood the S. 75 IEA but when u kindly say about "secondary evidence" then I am in need of little help here. Kindly advise and oblize me with expert inputs on abv. question as trail court hearing is nearer