VITHU GOVINDA Vs. RAMJI YELLUJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case comes before us by way of revision under our general jurisdiction from a decision of a Mamlatdar who is said to have committed a material error in procedure in that he disregarded provisions of Section 11 of the Indian Oaths Act 1873.

(2.) The principal question at issue in the suit was what he the plaintiff or the defendant was in possession.

(3.) It has been decided by a Full Bench decision of the High Court in Calcutta in Maniram Deb v. Debi Charan Deb (1869) 4 Beng. L.R. 97 (F.B.) that " a statement by a witness that a party is in possession is in point of law, admissible evidence of the fact that such party was in possession "; and if it is evidence of the fact, then under s" 11 of the Oaths Act it is conclusive proof of the matters stated.