Skip to content


Manicka Mudaliar Vs. Shanmugasundara Mudaliar - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Reported in(1982)2MLJ301
AppellantManicka Mudaliar
RespondentShanmugasundara Mudaliar
Excerpt:
- - in other words, the genuineness or otherwise of those documents and the veracity of the contents of the same as well as the admissibility or otherwise as per the provisions of the indian evidence act can be taken into consideration by a court of law before actually give a finding regarding the points that had been raised in the petition......which is known to each citizen in this country, that the same have to be proved in accord with the indian evidence act so that the contents of the said documents can be taken as evidence. by merely marking the documents by consent, the court is not obliged to look into the contents, unless those documents are formally proved in accordance with the provisions of the indian evidence act. the indian evidence act contemplates only certain documents that can be taken judicial notice of and when they are enumerated, apart from the said documents, no other document could be taken judicial notice of by a court. under the circumstances, in the instant case, when exhibit a-1, the profession-tax certificate issued by the president, panchayat, penparappi, dated 5th february, 1979, was filed on.....
Judgment:
ORDER

S. Swamikkannu, J.

1. This is a civil revision petition against the order in E.P. No. 583 of 1979 in O.S. No. 1252 of 1970 on the file of the District Munsif of Ariyalur, wherein documents only have been filed, but no oral evidence has been let in with respect to those documents and on the contents of the same the lower Court had come to a conclusion. The documents, when they are inducted in a suit by way of proof, it is the elementary principle, which is known to each citizen in this country, that the same have to be proved in accord with the Indian Evidence Act so that the contents of the said documents can be taken as evidence. By merely marking the documents by consent, the Court is not obliged to look into the contents, unless those documents are formally proved in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act. The Indian Evidence Act contemplates only certain documents that can be taken judicial notice of and when they are enumerated, apart from the said documents, no other document could be taken judicial notice of by a Court. Under the circumstances, in the instant case, when Exhibit A-1, the profession-tax certificate issued by the President, Panchayat, Penparappi, dated 5th February, 1979, was filed on behalf of the petitioner and on behalf of the respondent, Exhibit B-1 the income certificate issued by the Commissioner, Panchayat Union. Sendurai and Exhibit B-2, small farmer card j issued to the respondent on 2nd September, 1978, cannot be said to have been proved in accordance with the principles of Evidence Act, unless some witness speaks about the same. In other words, the genuineness or otherwise of those documents and the veracity of the contents of the same as well as the admissibility or otherwise as per the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act can be taken into consideration by a Court of law before actually give a finding regarding the points that had been raised in the petition. Therefore in the instant case, Exhibits A-1, B-1 and B-2 cannot be said to have been proved. They have to be marked subject to admissibility and relevancy and the documents that are filed cannot be construed as relevant documents. Under these circumstances, the one and the only course that is available for this Court, in the interest of justice, is to remand the matter for fresh disposal to the lower Court, after setting aside the order in; question and direct the lower Court to give liberty to both sides to adduce evidence, both oral and documentary, and thereafter come to an independent conclusion in accordance with the law on the real evidence that will be available on record. Under these circumstances, the order under revision is set aside and the civil revision petition is allowed. The lower Court is directed to take the matter on its file and deal with the matter afresh in accordance with the law, soon after the records in this case are received by it. Under the circumstances, there is no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //