9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Interpretation of Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act regarding admissibility of a witness's deposition in a different case.
Summary: The 1st respondent filed a suit for recovery based on a promissory note, which was decreed. Subsequently, in an execution petition, the 1st respondent sought to mark the deposition of the petitioner from a different suit. The petitioner objected citing Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act. The executing Court overruled the objection and allowed the deposition to be marked as an exhibit, leading to the revision petition. The main issue was whether the deposition of the petitioner in a different suit could be admitted as evidence in the current execution petition. Section 33 of the Act was crucial in this regard, outlining conditions for the admissibility of a witness's evidence in subsequent proceedings involving the same parties and similar issues. The Court emphasized that the conditions under Section 33 must be met for such evidence to be admissible. In this case, the petitioner was alive and available for examination, rendering the deposition inadmissible. The 1st respondent failed to establish any of the conditions required by the provision. The Court distinguished the present case from a precedent where a witness was confronted with a statement from another suit, highlighting the difference between confronting a witness with a statement and incorporating the entire deposition into the record of a different case. Ultimately, the civil revision petition was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and no costs were awarded. The miscellaneous petition filed was also disposed of accordingly.
|
