What is the relevant provision for admitting hearsay evidence when the maker is not available in civil trials?

In civil trials, hearsay evidence can indeed be admitted under certain conditions when the maker of the statement is not available. Specifically, the law recognizes that hearsay may be considered if it is perceived to be factual and aligns with the principles established under the relevant provisions of the Evidence Act. Such provisions aim to allow the court to assess the reliability and relevance of the hearsay evidence presented to it.

This is particularly important in situations where directly obtaining testimony from a witness is impossible due to unavailability, whether due to death, illness, or other valid reasons. The court evaluates the hearsay evidence based on its factual reliability and the context in which it was made, balancing the need for a fair trial with the practicalities of evidence gathering.

Other options do not accurately reflect the legal standards surrounding hearsay evidence; the best evidence rule and a requirement for expert testimony do not pertain specifically to hearsay admissibility in civil contexts, and corroboration by written documents is not a general requirement for hearsay to be admitted, making them less relevant in this scenario.