Supreme Court: Expecting a Minor to Respond to a Public Court Notice is ‘Perverse’  ||  SC: Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Applies to S. 11 Arbitration Act, Barring Fresh Arbiration After Abandonment  ||  SC: Later Sanction Requirement Won’t Invalidate Cognizance Taken When No Prior Bar Existed  ||  SC: Documents Not Admitted by an Employee in an Enquiry Must be Proved Through Witnesses  ||  Delhi HC: MHA Has Authority to Initiate Disciplinary Proceedings Against AGMUT IAS Officers  ||  MP HC: Financial Hardship or Mere Allegations of Lawyer’s Negligence Cannot Excuse Delayed Appeal  ||  Patna HC: Blanket Approach of Denying Public Employment to Individuals Named in an FIR is Unfair  ||  Kerala HC: Repeated Possession of Even Small Quantities of Narcotic Drugs Can Invoke KAAPA  ||  Calcutta HC: Employers May Deduct Penal Rent From Gratuity of Employees Refusing to Vacate Quarters  ||  Calcutta High Court: ECI Not Singling Out Bengal, More Transfers in Other Poll-Bound States    

SC: Photocopies are Not Evidence Unless Conditions for Leading Secondary Evidence are Proved - (09 Feb 2026)

LAW OF EVIDENCE

Supreme Court set aside a sale based on a photocopied Power of Attorney, holding that a photocopy is secondary evidence and inadmissible unless it satisfies Section 65 of the Evidence Act, which allows such evidence only when the original cannot be produced for valid reasons.

Tags : EVIDENCE   PHOTOCOPIES   POWER OF ATTORNEY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved