MUTHUSAMI PILLAI Vs. DORASAMI PILLAI
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) It was highly irregular on the part of the Subordinate Judge to allow Exhibit V to be used in evidence; no reasons are given for admitting it, and no evidence appears to have been taken.
(2.) The document, however, is of no importance, because it does not contain the admission which it had been supposed to contain. It does not support the respondents case. Apart from this document, we can find no evidence on which the finding of the Subordinate Judge on the 1 issue could be supported ; still less on which the finding in plaintiff's favour could be reversed.
(3.) In the 4 and 5 paragraphs of his judgment various speculative observations are made by the Subordinate Judge, but no facts are referred to from which the inference in favour of self-acquisition could legally be drawn.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.