IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIDNARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISIDICTION ORIDNARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISIDICTION ORIDNARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISIDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.942 OF 2005 IN SUIT NO.38 OF 1985 Indian Overseas Bank .. Plaintiffs Vs. Jagdish & Co. & Anr. .. Defendants Ms.J.M.Sidhwa i/b M/s.Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt and Caroe for the plaintiffs Mr.A.Panicker i/b M</s.Khaitan Jaykar for the defendants CORAM: S.U. KAMDAR, J. CORAM: S.U. KAMDAR, J. CORAM: S.U. KAMDAR, J. DATE : 9TH AUGUST, 2005 DATE : 9TH AUGUST, 2005 DATE : 9TH AUGUST, 2005 P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : . The present chamber summons is taken out to lead secondary evidence. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs has filed compilation of documents containing xerox copies of the said documents and by the present chamber summons it has been requested that the same may be taken on record as admissible evidence. In absence of originals being available, xerox copies are permitted as secondary evidence under sub section 2 of section 63 of the Evidence Act. In so far as the requirement of s.65 is concerned, plaintiffs have stated that some of the documents have been lost from the custody of Mumbai Port Trust to whom the said documents were forwarded by letter dt.23.8.99 and some of the documents are misplaced and are not traceable in their office. I find that the explanation given by the Officers of the bank is satisfactory. In my view, the requirement of s.63 and 65 are complied with. I therefore, permit the plaintiffs to produce xerox copies as secondary evidence subject to proof of contents thereof and it is kept open for the defendants to contend that if any of the documents is either tampered with or fabricated then the same should not be accepted in evidence. Chamber Summons is disposed of accordingly. However, there shall be no order as to costs.