RAM JAS AND ORS. VS SURENDRA NATH AND ANR. AIR (1980)ALL385
- In Om Prakash v. Bhagwan (AIR 1974 All 389) the document produced was more than 20 years old but it formed the basis of the defence. Considering Ss. 90 and 90-A of the Evidence Act the Court observed.
- "It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the defendants-appellants that the sale deed in question was the basis of the defence and was relied upon by the defendants in their written statement. Nothing therefore in Section 90 or Section 90-A of the Evidence Act as amended by the U. P. Civil Laws (Amendment) Act 1954 will come to the assistance of the defendants-appellants. Except for this conclusion contained in the judgment there is no discussion from which we may benefit for making an interpretation of Sections 90 and 90-A of the Evidence Act.
- The presumptions under the Evidence Act are only the inferences which a logical and reasonable mind normally draws. Facts and circumstances (from) which certain inferences follow are indicated in various provisions of the Evidence Act running from Sections 79 to 90-A. As already seen the sections of the Evidence Act Lay down different circumstances in which a presumption is to be raised.
Whenever the law permits the raising of a presumption the Court can by reason of Section 4 of the Evidence Act raise the presumption for purpose of proof of a fact. If the presumption is available in one section it can raise it under that section. If it is not available in one section and is available in another section, then the Court can raise presumption under that section. It all depends upon the circumstances available in the case as applicable to a particular document.
