Civil Revision Petition No. 1782 of 2009 · High Court · 2010
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 s. 74
Judgment
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears on behalf of the respondents, though the matter has come up on the last occasion and again today. The petitioner filed this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, assailing the order dated 31.03.2009 in I.A.No.308 of 2009 in O.S.No.79 of 2005 on the file of the Senior civil Judge Tenali, in rejecting the application filed under Order VIII Rule 1 (a) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to receive the two documents, one dated 30.06.2004, the Certificate issued by the Commissioner, Tenali Municipality and the other dated 25.06.2008, Certified copy of the Cyclone Victims Relief Fund-1977 (Beneficiaries List) and mark the same on behalf of the send defendant. The Court below rejected the said petition on the ground that they are not public documents and as such they are not admissible. Hence, the revision. On the face of them, it is seen that both the documents are issued by public officials and therefore, they cannot be said that they are not public documents under Section 74 of the Indian Evidence Act,
Operative part
1872. In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and consequently, I.A.No.308 of 2009 stands allowed. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) 18th June 2010 RRB
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151; Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 74.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 18 Jun 2010. The bench was B PRAKASH RAO.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.