Production of document

Claim of the plaintiff, that the sellers / vendors (two in number) sold the suit property to him vide the agreement and promised to transfer the suit-property after redemption of mortgage charge from the Bank, was concurrently rejected

Arguments of the petitioner / plaintiff that the period of thirty (30) years for presumption under Art. 100 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, is to be calculated till the date when the agreement was brought on record, but the Trial Court reckoned this period up-till institution of the suit

Validity

Article 100 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, stipulates that thirty (30) years are to be taken on the date when a document is produced from any custody

The period of thirty (30) years is to be reckoned, not from the date upon which deed is filed in the Court, but from the date on which it has been tendered in evidence, its genuineness or otherwise becomes the subject of proof

Thus, in the present case, though the Trial Court fell into error while reckoning the period up-till filing of the suit, however, this error has no bearing on the result of the case, keeping in view the facts of the case and the evidence led by the parties

Furthermore, Art. 100 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, clearly gives discretion to the Court to apply presumption keeping in view the particular case

Two Courts below have disbelieved the evidence of the petitioner and the High Court also found that the evidence of the petitioner was not credible

Revision, filed by the plaintiff, was dismissed in limine, in circumstances.

Claim of the plaintiff, that the sellers / vendors (two in number) sold the suit property to him vide the agreement and promised to transfer the suit-property after redemption of mortgage charge from the Bank, was concurrently rejected

Validity

To presume the signatures and every other part of such document which purports to be in the handwriting of any person and that it is executed by the person by whom it purports to be executed, Court should be very careful about applying any presumption under Art. 100 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, in favour of old documents when the same are produced during the trial of a suit, in which the proprietary rights are set up and the Court in its discretion can refuse to apply presumption where evidence in proof of the document is produced and then it is disbelieved

The word 'may' used in Art. 100 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, signifies that presumption envisaged therein does not follow as a matter of course

Two Courts below have disbelieved the evidence of the petitioner and the High Court also found that the evidence of the petitioner was not credible

Revision, filed by the plaintiff, was dismissed in limine, in circumstances.

Unproved documents could not be regarded as proved merely because the same has been admitted in evidence by court without any objection

Order XIII, R. 4, C.P.C. must be strictly complied with

Document once brought on record and exhibited, even if no objection is taken from other side when the same is exhibited, court is not prevented from adjudicating its nature to ascertain that whether same is valid and not fake.

Order XIII, R. 1 & 2, C.P.C. empower the court to allow consideration of documents even during recording of evidence or even after the evidence had been completed.