Evidence Act vs BSA: Is it hearsay or not?

Suppose we have a case where a witness testifies, "I overheard Sanjay telling Rohan that there was a dispute between them." If Rohan then testifies, "I was involved in a dispute with Sanjay," is this Rohan's testimony hearsay? If yes, why; if no, why not? According to the Evidence Act, hearsay is the statement of a person who is not present in court and is offered for the truth of the matter asserted. But what about the BSA (Best Evidence Rule), which says an original document is always better than a secondary document, even if it's a witness's testimony about what the document says. So, is Rohan's testimony an out-of-court statement for which no witness is present, or is it the "original" information about the dispute? Give your views!