Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Shri M. Ratnavarma Padival, filed a Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the judgment and decree dated 29.07.2013 in R.A. No. 25/2012 passed by the II Additional District Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore, which confirmed the judgment and decree dated 22.06.2011 in O.S. No. 111/1999 passed by the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore. The appellant had sued the respondent, Shri Rathnavarma Ajri (since deceased, represented by legal heirs), for recovery of money lent. The trial court dismissed the suit, and the first appellate court confirmed the dismissal. The appellant contended that the courts below erred in rejecting a photostat copy of a document (alleged to be a promissory note or acknowledgment) as inadmissible secondary evidence, and in holding that the suit was not maintainable for non-production of the money lender's licence under Section 11 of the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961. The High Court framed two substantial questions of law: (a) whether a photostat copy compared with the original is admissible as secondary evidence; and (b) whether Section 11 of the Karnataka Money Lenders Act mandates production of the licence to maintain a suit. The appellant argued that the photostat copy was compared with the original and thus admissible under Section 63 of the Evidence Act, 1872, and that Section 11 does not require production of the licence. The respondent argued that secondary evidence is not admissible without proof of loss of the original, and that the suit is not maintainable without producing the licence. The High Court held that a photostat copy compared with the original is secondary evidence under Section 63 and can be admitted if the conditions under Section 65 are satisfied, including proof of existence or production of the original. The court also held that Section 11 of the Karnataka Money Lenders Act does not mandate production of the licence; it only requires that the money lender holds a valid licence. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgments of the lower courts, and remanded the matter to the trial court for fresh disposal in accordance with law, directing the trial court to consider the admissibility of the photostat copy and the licence issue afresh.
Headnote
A) Evidence Act, 1872 - Secondary Evidence - Admissibility of Photostat Copy - Section 63 - A photostat copy compared with the original is admissible as secondary evidence if the conditions under Section 65 are satisfied, including proof of existence or production of the original. The court held that a xerox copy compared with the original is secondary evidence under Section 63 and can be admitted if the original is not produced despite notice or if its existence is proved. (Paras 1-10) B) Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 - Money Lending Licence - Requirement to Maintain Suit - Section 11 - Section 11 does not mandate that a money lender must produce his licence to maintain a suit for recovery of loan. The provision only requires that the money lender holds a valid licence; non-production does not bar the suit. The court held that the suit is maintainable even if the licence is not produced, as long as the money lender is licensed. (Paras 11-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a photostat copy compared with the original is admissible as secondary evidence without proof of loss of original; and whether Section 11 of the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 mandates production of money lender's licence to maintain a suit.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgments and decrees of the trial court and first appellate court, and remanded the matter to the trial court for fresh disposal in accordance with law. The trial court was directed to consider the admissibility of the photostat copy and the issue of licence afresh.
Law Points
- Admissibility of secondary evidence
- Photostat copy compared with original
- Section 63 Evidence Act
- 1872
- Section 65 Evidence Act
- Section 11 Karnataka Money Lenders Act
- 1961
- Money lending licence requirement
