1. After posting the mail dated 25th Nov. 2008, the author of the mail Priyashiva seems to have lost interest in knowing the response form others. It is as good as jumping the from the wagon after flogging the horse.
2. Mr. KCS. Kutty vide his posting dated 30th Nov. 2008, had raised certain queries relevant to the case that correct advise can be given. So far, no response from the author of the mail on these earnest queries.
3. Mr. Gjendra Patil vide his posting dated 30th Nov. 2008, has cited Sec. 4 of the Information Technology act, 2000 therein clarifying the definition of 'Document', which includes electronic form also. Much to the surprise, three follwing postings seeks Mr. Patil to email the citation to them. Does it not strike to anyone that the entire IT Act, 2000 is available from the Net free? Pl. have the habit of visiting Govt. Of India / NIC site / indiacode, where one can download all bare Acts.
4. As regards the validity of Email being accepted as valid evidence in the indian Court, consequent to the IT Act, 2000 and the concomittant amendement of Sec. 3 of The indian Evidence act, 1872, such 'electronic records' are valid evidence. The burden as per the amendmment is on the the contesting party to deny that such evidence is not a vaid evidence.
Once again, i am disappointed for the recklessness of the author not answering the questions raised by Mr. KCS.Kutty.
Advocate & HR Consultant
16th March 2009 From India