Skip to main content

Andhra HC Approves Witness Examination Over Skype

In Sirangai Shoba @ Shoba Munnuri rep.by her General Power of Attorney, M.Narayana  
Rao  Vs Sirangi Muralidhar Rao, rep. by his Power of Attorney Smt. Sirangi Vijayalakshmi. the Hon'ble Andhra HC

Upholding a trial court order allowing witness examination on Skype for recording evidence in a divorce petition, the High Court of Hyderabad has held that examination of witnesses and recording of evidence by commissioner contemplated by Order XVIII Rule 4 C.P.C from the words ‘witness in attendance’ are to be understood as person being present and it need not be physical presence. The court held that recording of evidence through audio, video link or through internet by Skype or similar technological device is permissible and complying with the words ‘in attendance’. Justice Dr B Siva Sankara Rao observed that there was a need to avail of technological innovations with necessary safeguards and precautions in the justice delivery system for speedy and effective disposal of cases. The court said recording of evidence by way of video conferencing could be ordered to be done in cases where the attendance of the witness could not be ensured without delay, expense and inconvenience. Today in America, video recording is common in most courts, the judge observed. The court also referred to a recent judgment by Delhi High Court in International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) vs. Madhu Bala Nath wherein it had observed that courts must be liberal and pragmatic in allowing the witnesses to depose through video conferencing. Read the Live Law report here. The Madras High Court had conducted court proceedings over Skype from Chennai for the first time in a case related to 89 inmates of an unauthorised private Children’s Home for girls run by Mose Ministries in Tiruchi. Read the Live Law report here.

Read more at: http://www.livelaw.in/andhra-hc-approves-witness-examination-skype/

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more