SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1917 Supreme(SC) 60

(Rai Bhaiya) Dirgaj Deo Bahadur – Appellant
Versus
Beni Mahto and others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
T.L. Wilson and Co., J.M. Parikh, DeGruyther

Lord Parker:-

In this case the question is as to the nature of the Respondents' holding. It is admitted that the document under which their predecessor-in-title originally held, and which created the holding, is lost, and the only question that their Lordships have to decide is whether another document consisting of a register, as evidence of the contents, was or was not properly admitted. Now clearly this register is an official document, and therefore it is admissible in evidence under section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act. It may be possible that in the case of such a document, if it could be shown that any particular part was in excess of the official duty by reason of which it came into existence, that part might not be admissible, but no attempt has been made to show this in the present case. The document has been admitted by both Courts below as proper evidence in the case, and their Lordships see no reason to reverse or to vary that decision.

The appeal therefore should, in their Lordships' opinion, be dismissed. The Respondents not having appeared, there is no question of costs. Their Lordships will humbly advise His Majesty accordingly.

Appeal dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top