Privy Council(1917) 10 PRI CK 0006

(Rai Bhaiya) Dirgaj Deo Bahadur vs Beni Mahto and others

Privy Council · Decided on 16 October 1917 · Citation: (1917) AIR(PC) 197

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ameer Ali, John Edge, Lord Wrenbury, Lord Parker of Waddington, JJ.

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 199 words

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.