Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2003 (11) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2003 (11) TMI 605 - SC - Indian Laws


Issues involved: Suit for recovery of possession, admissibility and evidentiary value of rent receipts.

In the present case, the suit for recovery of possession of the suit premises was decreed by the city civil court but later set aside by the Division Bench of the High Court, leading to an appeal in the Supreme Court. The main issue raised before the Supreme Court was the admissibility and evidentiary value of the rent receipts which were crucial in determining the tenancy status of the contesting respondent.

The contesting respondent claimed to be in possession of the suit premises as a tenant and produced rent receipts and an agreement of tenancy to support his claim. The plaintiff, on the other hand, alleged that the rent receipts were fabricated by the defendant, as he had access to the rent bills kept by the plaintiff. The trial court found in favor of the plaintiff, stating that the rent receipts were manufactured by the defendant. However, the High Court, on appeal, reversed this finding and accepted the rent receipts as genuine, emphasizing that the plaintiff failed to explain how his signatures appeared on the back of the rent receipts.

The High Court highlighted that the defendant's claim of tenancy based on the rent receipts was credible, as the signatures on the receipts were admitted by the plaintiff and marked as exhibits by the court. The court emphasized that the plaintiff did not dispute his signatures on the rent receipts, shifting the burden of proof onto the plaintiff to explain the circumstances of how the receipts were signed by him. The High Court, as the first court of appeals, re-examined the evidence and concluded that the defendant's claim of tenancy was valid, leading to the dismissal of the suit.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the High Court, stating that the High Court was justified in re-evaluating the evidence and reaching a different conclusion from the trial court. The appeal was dismissed, and the parties were left to bear their own costs in the appeal.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates