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

1957 Supreme(MP) 229

M.HIDAYATULLAH, B.K.CHOUDHURI
Ahmad Ali Abdul Razak – Appellant
Versus
Mohammad Hanif Ibrahim – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.RAZAK, G.P.SINGH,

JUDGMENT :

( 1. ) THIS appeal is against the decision of the Additional District Judge, Umaria, in civil suit No. 54 of 1954, decided on 30th December 1955. The plaintiff is the appellant whose suit for Rs. 5000/- against the two defendants failed in the Court below.

( 2. ) ACCORDING to the plaintiff, a sum of Rs. 5000/- was borrowed by the two defendants on the 15th June 1952. He produced in support of his case his own account books showing an entry to that effect. The defendants denied the loan and their case was accepted in the Court below.

( 3. ) IN this appeal the short question is whether the plaintiff had succeeded in proving his case. No doubt, the account books were produced, but the munim, who wrote them, was not examined. Under Section 34 of the Indian Evidence Act, account books by themselves cannot be sufficient and therefore some other evidence was necessary. This evidence consists: of the plaintiff and of persons who were said to be present at the time the loan was given. The trial Court did not believe these witnesses. The first corroborating witness is a pan seller, Man Mohan singh (P. W. 1), who says: that he was called to the shop of the plaintiff at about 8 or 8. 3
















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