Genuineness of document

2024 CLC 1575 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 12Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 91Complaint before the Consumer CourtGenuineness of documentPresumption of correctnessDocument produced as evidence admitted without any objectionEffectOral evidenceScope

Claim / stance of the claimant (buyer of vehicle) before the Consumer Court, was that an extra amount was recoverable from Automobile Manufacturing Company (company) which was illegally charged to him at the time of delivery of vehicle , which amount he paid under protest

Consumer Court allowed the complaint against which judgment debtor / company preferred appeal

Validity

Record revealed that, in support of his contention, respondent/ complainant himself appeared as a witness and reiterated the stance taken by him in his complaint and only produced the concerned Manager but no other document was produced by him to substantiate his plea that the respondent could not charge him for any excess price of the vehicle at the time of its delivery

Conversely, the appellants produced one witness, who exhibited three documents i.e. authority letter, relationship contract, delivery order and one relating to Federal Excise Duty

Said witness further stated in his statement that duly exhibited relationship contract contained the signature of respondent /complainant

Said relationship contract reflected that the price prevailing at the time of delivery would be charged

Presumption of correctness was attached to the relationship contract which was duly exhibited without any objection from other side

When a document is produced and exhibited without objection, it always carries sanctity and strong evidence is required to cast an aspersion on its genuineness

Such document is binding on the parties to the lis

Under Art. 91 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, once a document is produced as evidence and admitted in evidence without any objection, it amounts that the same has been duly proved

While there were contradictions regarding place of agreement and handing over pay-orders etc., in oral evidence but the documentary evidence prevailed over the oral evidence

Oral evidence does not exclude documentary evidence

Document can be rebutted by a document only

Oral evidence of respondent / complainant could not rebut the documentary evidence of appellants

Respondent /complainant while examining one of the witnesses of appellants put conceding questions, thus proving that agreement took place at company (appellant's) showroom

Said conceding questions and their answers clearly depicted that the signatures on the relationship agreement were that of respondent / complainant

High Court set-aside the impugned judgment passed by the Consumer Court

Consequently, the complaint filed by the respondent stood dismissed

Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

2016 PCrLJ 732 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 7Determination of age of accusedGenuineness of documentsContention of petitioner was that Form-B contained cutting which had made the same doubtfulValidityParticulars mentioned in the Form did not contain and cutting or tampering

Document showed that birth entry was recorded in the official record and old registration number had also been mentioned in Birth Certificate meaning thereby that entry of birth of accused was made in the official record in 1999

Documents, in circumstances were genuine.

2015 YLR 1429 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Art. 78Genuineness of document

Production of document and proof of document were two different subjects, document could be produced in evidence which was always subject to proof as required under Art. 78 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984

Court was vested with the authority and jurisdiction to ascertain the genuineness and authenticity of any document in order to arrive at a just and fair conclusion on the touchstone and parameters laid in Art. 78 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984.

2013 YLR 2846 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Art. 78Genuineness of document

Production of document and proof of document were two different subjects, document could be produced in evidence which was always subject to proof as required under Art. 78 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984

Court was vested with the authority and jurisdiction to ascertain the genuineness and authenticity of any document in order to arrive at a just and fair conclusion on the touchstone and parameters laid in Art. 78 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984.