LawCite Search | LawCite Markup Tool | Help | Feedback

Law
Cite


Cases Referring to this Case | Law Reform Reports Referring to this Case | Law Journal Articles Referring to this Case | Legislation Cited | Cases and Articles Cited

Help

Brenhilda " (4) and C P Narain Singh v B P Narain Singh (5)] Since Ba Thein, the Copyist himself has appeared and sworn to the genuineness of the copies and the signatures appearing thereon, the presumption asked to be drawn under section 90 of the Evidence Act need not be taken into account Nevertheless, unless the contrary is shown there is a presumption that the acts of a Court have been regularly carried out [See Bijnath v Sri Bhagwau (6)] and it cannot but be conceded that the copies now filed by the defendants are genuine and correct The statement contained in the documents Exhibits I and VI, the one an admission made by the plaintiff himself and the other, a fact sworn to by the deceased U)   flag  2

AIR 1938 Oudh 69
All India Reporter, Oudh Series
India - Uttar Pradesh

Cases Referring to this Case

Case Name Citation(s) Court Jurisdiction Date †  Full Text Citation Index
Emperor v P R Mehta, representative of Bhaidas Karsandas and Co, Cotton Firm, Khamgaon [1940] AllINRprNag 51; [1940] ILR Nag 615; 42 Cr LJ 66; [1940] AIR Nag 385 All India Reporter - Nagpur India - Maharashtra 23 May 1940 AsianLII flag
Ganptrao Yadorao Pande v Nagorao Vinayakrao Joshi [1939] AllINRprNag 112; [1940] AIR Nag 382 All India Reporter - Nagpur India - Maharashtra 18 Oct 1939 AsianLII flag

LawCite: Privacy | Disclaimers | Conditions of Use | Acknowledgements | Feedback