Supreme Court Affirms Admissibility Of Certified Sale Deed Copies In Trials

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has clarified that a certified copy of an original sale deed is indeed admissible as evidence in a trial. This decision, delivered by Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice C.T. Ravikumar, offers a comprehensive interpretation of specific sections of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and the Registration Act, setting a precedent for future property-related disputes.

The case, titled “Appaiya VS Andimuthu@ Thangapandi & Ors.”, centered on a land ownership dispute tracing back to 1928. The High Court, during a second appeal, had cast doubts on the admissibility of the certified copy of a registered sale deed presented by the plaintiff. The defendant had argued that only the original sale deed should be accepted as evidence. Contrary to this, the Supreme Court provided a different viewpoint.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court cited Section 65(e) of the Evidence Act, which allows secondary evidence when the original is classified as a public document under Section 74. The court observed,

“As per Section 74(2) of the Evidence Act, public records kept of private documents are deemed ‘public documents.’ The original sale deed, in this context, falls within the definition of a public document.”

The apex court’s decision was anchored in Section 77, which permits the use of certified copies of public documents as secondary evidence. Section 79 further establishes a presumption of authenticity for certified copies of documents recognized as admissible by law. The judges emphasized,

“In view of the provisions of the Evidence Act and Section 57(5) of the Registration Act, the certified copy of the sale deed was found admissible in evidence for proving the contents of its original.”

Furthermore, the Supreme Court highlighted that a second appeal is permissible only if it presents a significant question of law, as outlined in Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The High Court’s choice to overturn the conclusions of the subordinate courts was deemed inappropriate. Consequently, the Supreme Court reinstated the verdict issued by the trial court.

Case Details: