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

1978 MarsdenLR 185

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
U N PANDEY – Appellant
Versus
HOTEL MARCO POLO PTE LTD – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:JB Jeyaretnam ,Respondent Advocate: TT Durai

JUDGMENT

Sinnathuray J:

1

[1] Under s 3(3) of the Evidence Act, "A fact is said to be 'proved' when, after considering the matters before it, the court either believes it to exist or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists." Then sub-section 4 deals with "disproved". Finally sub-section 5 says "A fact is said to be 'not proved' when it is neither proved nor disproved."

9

[2] It is not often realised that in civil cases, as much as in criminal cases, a party must prove his case before the burden of proof shifts to the other side. In a criminal case the prosecution's burden is a heavy one. In a civil case, it is on a balance of probabilities. But the proof is that the balance must be tilted by the plaintiff before the defendant makes his case.

[3] In this case, after four days of hearing, I invited Mr Durai for the defendants to address me this morning on the facts. He submits that the plaintiff and his material witnesses are not to be believed. Taken somewhat by surprise, as he may have been, counsel for the defendants, has nevertheless given instances from the evidence of the

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