Once again,
A bench of Hon'ble Mr. Chief Justice N V Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A S Bopanna and Hon'ble Mr.
"What is the evidential value of
"Prima facie we are not satisfied with the HC direction for depositing the money in an escrow account. We are not considering the purported admission in
Brief Facts -
- In 2016,
South Delhi Municipal Corporation and a consortium consisting of the Respondents and another business entered into the Concession Agreement which included the collection and transportation of waste items after they had gone through a waste management process. -
In 2017, the Respondents entered into a Master Service Agreement with the appellant to complete a portion of the project as a subcontractor. The parties and several other entities, including
Axis Bank Limited , entered into another arrangement called the Escrow agreement in October, 2017. All funds received by the Respondents under the Concession Agreement would be placed in an Escrow account withAxis Bank serving as the Escrow Agent under this agreement. - A2Z entered into a separate agreement with Quippo Infrastructure to complete a portion of the contract work, and it was agreed that the money collected by A2Z would be placed in an escrow account from which the parties would be paid.
-
The
Master Service contract with Quippo was cancelled by A2Z in the year 2020. As result of termination of the contract Quippo Infrastructure moved an application to theCalcutta High Court for the appointment of arbitration panel in order to resolve the issue arising of the dispute. The Calcutta High Court inQuippo Infrastructure Ltd vsA2Z Infraservices Ltd & Anr 2 of relied on theWhatsApp communication datedMarch 19, 2020 wherein the respondent A2Z allegedly admitted due payment of INR8.18 crore to the Quippo Infrastructure (now Viom Infra ventures). Further the court also relied upon an e-mail dated 2018 where the A2Z infrastructure have agreed to deposit the payments received from South Delhi Municipal to an Escrow Account.The Calcutta High Court relying on the same ordered that the Respondents A2Z Infraservice to deposit the due payment in an escrow account transparently overlooking the fact that the A2Z contended that that e-mail/WhatsApp was falsified and manufactured and therefore should not be considered acceptable in court.-
Later Aggrieved by the order of the
Calcutta High Court A2Z Infra decided to challenge the order and moved an application in the Hon'bleSupreme Court . The Hon'bleSupreme Court of India onJuly 14, 2021 ruled that the aforementioned communications on the social media network WhatsApp have no evidentiary value and that the source of such messages cannot be identified, particularly in commercial partnerships regulated by agreements.
Conclusion
Despite the modern ubiquity of instant messaging and social media platforms, based on the discussions on point of law and the cases that are coming before the Hon'ble
In the year 2000, the Indian government specifically enacted section 65A of the Evidence Act, which established certain criteria for the validity of secondary evidence before any court of law. The government also established the Information Technology Act in the year 2000, thereby demonstrating the legislature's favorable attitude toward the concept that "according to the changing requirements and conditions of our world, the legislation regulating it should also adapt."
Footnotes
1.
2. Quippo Infrastructure Ltd.Vs.
Related Posts
WHATSAPP GROUP ADMINS OFF THE HOOK FOR POSTS/COMMENTS BY OTHER GROUP MEMBERS
'FORWARDED AS RECEIVED' WHATSAPP MESSAGE NOT GUILTY OF UNPUBLISHED PRICE SENSITIVE INFORMATION
For further information please contact at S.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Mr
317, Lawyers' Chambers
110003
Tel: 114012-3000
Fax: 114012-3000
E-mail: Vikrant@ssrana.com
URL: www.ssrana.in
© Mondaq Ltd, 2021 - Tel. +44 (0)20 8544 8300 - http://www.mondaq.com, source