Yes, a party can give oral evidence to prove the contents of a document under certain circumstances,

as provided for in the Indian Evidence Act of 1872.

Section 63 of the Evidence Act allows for secondary evidence to be admitted in certain situations,
including when the original document is not available. In such cases, oral evidence may be admissible
to prove the contents of the document.

Section 65 of the Evidence Act provides for the circumstances in which secondary evidence may be
given. Under sub-section (a) of Section 65, when the original document is lost or destroyed, secondary
evidence of the contents of the document may be given.

Furthermore, under sub-section (b) of Section 65, if the original document is in the possession of the
opposite party, and the party has been called upon to produce it, but has failed to do so, then
secondary evidence of the contents of the document may be given.

In both these situations, oral evidence may be used to prove the contents of the document in
question, along with other forms of secondary evidence such as copies or extracts.

It is important to note that the admissibility of oral evidence to prove the contents of a document is
subject to the rules of relevancy, admissibility, and weight of evidence. The court will assess the
reliability and credibility of the oral evidence, and may require corroboration or other supporting
evidence to validate it.

Therefore, while a party can give oral evidence to prove the contents of a document in certain
situations, such evidence must be supported by the provisions of the Evidence Act and must satisfy
the requirements of the court.

Certainly, here are 10 relevant points on the admissibility of oral evidence to prove the contents of a
document under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:

1. Section 63 of the Evidence Act allows for secondary evidence to be admitted in certain situations,
including when the original document is not available.

2. Secondary evidence of a document may include oral evidence, as well as copies or extracts.
3. Section 65 of the Evidence Act provides for the circumstances in which secondary evidence may be
given.

4. Sub-section (a) of Section 65 provides that when the original document is lost or destroyed,
secondary evidence of the contents of the document may be given.

5. Sub-section (b) of Section 65 provides that if the original document is in the possession of the
opposite party, and the party has been called upon to produce it, but has failed to do so, then
secondary evidence of the contents of the document may be given.

6. The admissibility of oral evidence to prove the contents of a document is subject to the rules of
relevancy, admissibility, and weight of evidence.

7. The court will assess the reliability and credibility of the oral evidence, and may require
corroboration or other supporting evidence to validate it.

8. Oral evidence may be used to prove the contents of a document in civil and criminal cases, subject
to the applicable rules of procedure.

9. In criminal cases, the Indian Evidence Act provides additional requirements for the admissibility of
oral evidence, including the need for corroboration in certain situations.

10. The party seeking to rely on oral evidence to prove the contents of a document must establish the
necessary foundation for its admission, including demonstrating that the original document is
unavailable or in the possession of the opposite party, as required by Section 65.

Yes, a party can give oral evidence to prove the contents of a document under certain circumstances as
provided by the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Section 62 of the Evidence Act states that the contents of a document can be proved by primary
evidence which means the document itself produced for the inspection of the court. Primary evidence
includes the original document, certified copies, and oral accounts of the contents of a document
given by a person who has seen the original.

However, Section 63 of the Evidence Act provides for the admission of secondary evidence under
certain circumstances, such as when the original document is lost or destroyed, in the possession of
the opposite party, a public document, or a certified copy of a public document.
Under Section 65 of the Evidence Act, if the original document is in the possession of the opposite
party and that party fails to produce it after being called upon to do so, secondary evidence can be
admitted. This secondary evidence may include oral testimony of the contents of the document given
by a person who has seen or heard the original document.

Similarly, under Section 65(a) of the Evidence Act, when the original document is lost or destroyed,
secondary evidence, such as a copy or oral testimony of the contents of the document, can be
admitted.

Therefore, a party may give oral evidence to prove the contents of a document in certain
circumstances as provided by the Evidence Act. However, the admissibility of such evidence is subject
to strict rules and requirements to ensure that it is genuine and accurate.

Under the Indian Evidence Act of 1872, documentary evidence can be proved by oral evidence. This
means that if a party wishes to rely on a document as evidence in court, they can do so by presenting
the original or a copy of the document, and by calling witnesses to testify about the document's
authenticity and contents.

Section 62 of the Evidence Act provides that primary evidence is the best evidence of the contents of a
document. Primary evidence is defined as the document itself produced for the inspection of the
court, and it includes original documents, certified copies, and oral accounts of the contents of a
document given by a person who has seen the original.

However, Section 63 of the Evidence Act provides that secondary evidence may also be admitted in
certain circumstances. Secondary evidence includes any document that is not primary evidence, such
as a copy of a document, or oral evidence of the contents of a document given by a person who has
not seen the original. The admissibility of secondary evidence is subject to certain conditions set out in
Section 65 of the Evidence Act, which include:

1. The original document must be in the custody or power of the person against whom the document
is sought to be proved, and that person must have had a reasonable opportunity to produce the
original in court.

2. The secondary evidence must be proved to be genuine and accurate.

3. The secondary evidence must be authenticated by a person who is acquainted with the document
and has compared the copy with the original.

4. The court must be satisfied that the secondary evidence is reliable and trustworthy.

Therefore, if a party wishes to rely on secondary evidence to prove the contents of a document, they
must satisfy the conditions set out in the Evidence Act, and must also provide oral evidence to
authenticate the document and establish its contents. The oral evidence may include testimony from
witnesses who have seen the original document, or who have personal knowledge of the contents of
the document.

In summary, under the Indian Evidence Act of 1872, documentary evidence can be proved by oral
evidence in certain circumstances. Primary evidence, such as the original document, is generally
preferred, but secondary evidence, such as a copy of a document or oral testimony, may also be
admitted if certain conditions are met. The admissibility of secondary evidence is subject to strict rules
and requirements to ensure that it is genuine and accurate.