SHRI MANUEL DO ROSARIO Vs. NIVRATTI MADHAV NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Pangam, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Mendes, learned Counsel for the respondent.

(2.) RULE. By consent heard forthwith.

(3.) MR. Pangam, learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that both the grounds on which the trial Court has rejected the application, are untenable in law. MR. Pangam submitted that in terms of Section 74 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 ('The Act' for short), the plan approved by the Municipal Council, Mormugao, was a public document. Therefore, the trial Court has erred in holding that the defendants were seeking to lead secondary evidence without establishing that the said document was a copy of the original. In so far as the second ground is concerned, MR. Pangam submitted that in terms of Section 77 of The Act, the document sought to be produced being a public document, its contents can be proved by production of the said document. MR. Pangam submitted that the petitioners are entitled to produce the said plan in evidence without examining any witness and the petitioners do not wish to examine any witness to prove the said plan since it is not required in law. In support of his submissions, he relied upon the following judgments :