Introduction:

The Patna High Court has ruled that the certified copy of a registered sale deed kept in the Registrar’s office is considered a public document and can be produced as secondary evidence under Section 74 of the Evidence Act, 1872. This decision came in the case of Ram Briksha Singh & Ors. versus Ramashray Singh & Ors., where the petitioners challenged the admissibility of a certified copy of a sale deed as secondary evidence.

Arguments of Both Sides:

Petitioner’s Argument:

The petitioners, represented by Advocates Bhupendra Narain Sinha, Shailendra Kumar, and Saket Kumar, argued that a certified copy of the sale deed should not be admissible as secondary evidence. They contended that such a copy does not prove the execution of the original document, merely its contents. The petitioners maintained that without direct evidence or the original document, the certified copy should not be sufficient for legal proceedings. They emphasized the need for strict adherence to evidence rules, particularly when dealing with property transactions, to prevent potential fraud or inaccuracies.

Respondent’s Argument:

The respondents, represented by Advocates Daya Shankar Prasad Sinha, Anand Saran, Shyameshwar Dayal, and Gaurav Kumar Sinha, countered that the certified copy of the registered sale deed is a public document under Section 74 of the Evidence Act. They argued that when a sale deed is registered, it becomes a public record maintained by the Registrar’s office, and certified copies of such records are admissible as secondary evidence. The respondents referred to several precedents, including the Supreme Court’s judgment in Appaiya Vs. Andimuthu @ Thangapandi & Ors. and the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision in Smt. Rekha Rana & Ors. Vs. Smt. Ratneshree Jain, to support their position that the certified copy of a registered document is a public document.

Court’s Judgment:

Justice Arun Kumar Jha of the Patna High Court examined the provisions of the Evidence Act and the Registration Act, as well as relevant case law. The court affirmed that a certified copy of a registered sale deed kept in the public record is indeed a public document. It is admissible as secondary evidence under Section 74 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The court clarified that while the certified copy can prove the contents of the original document, it does not, by itself, prove the execution of the original sale deed. This distinction is crucial to ensure that the authenticity and validity of the document’s execution are verified through other means if necessary.

The court referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling in Appaiya Vs. Andimuthu @ Thangapandi & Ors., where it was observed that a certified copy issued by the Registering Officer is a copy of the registration entry, which is a public document. Similarly, the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision in Smt. Rekha Rana & Ors. Vs. Smt. Ratneshree Jain supported the view that certified copies of registered documents are public documents.

Justice Jha concluded that the certified copy of the sale deed, being a public document, could be produced as secondary evidence without laying any foundation. However, he emphasized that it would only prove the contents of the original document and not its execution. The court found no infirmity in the trial court’s decision to admit the certified copy of the sale deeds as secondary evidence and thus dismissed the petition.