Whether any document can be exhibited if its maker has admitted his signature even if contents of document is not proved?
In the case of Mrs. Cynthia Martin Wd/o A.V. Martin v/s. Prembehari s/o. Makhanlal Yadu & Another reported in MANU/MH/0074/1998 : 1998 (1) Bom. C.R. 631, it is observed in paragraph 12 that:-
By the said letter, it was informed by the competent authority that the house was not situated in the slum area. Shri De submitted that the only witness, who has been examined, has not been able to give any details regarding the said letter and mere proof of the signature would not amount to the proof of the contents of the letter. It is true that mere proof of the signature could not prove the contents of the letter. However, that is not a case here. The letter is clear enough, and once the letter is proved by proving the signature of the maker thereof, there would hardly be any reason to doubt the same regarding the veracity of the contents therein.
24. In the case of Grasim Industries Limited (supra), following observation made in paragraph 6:-
In our opinion, when a person signs a document, there is a presumption, unless there is proof of force or fraud, that he has read the document properly and understood it and only then he has affixed his signatures thereon, otherwise no signature on a document can ever be accepted.
... Hence, it is difficult to accept the contention of the respondent while admitting that the document, Ext. D-8 bears his signatures that it was signed under some mistake.
25. In the case of Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Private Limited (supra), the following observation was made:-
The learned trial Judge curiously declined to exhibit the document and marked it for identification s Ex. X/6 on the ground that even if the signature of the vendor on the document is proved, unless the contents are proved, the document cannot be admitted. We are afraid we cannot share the view of the learned trial Judge. The document stands proved as soon as the fact of execution is proved and it is wholly irrelevant whether the contents are proved.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Writ Petition No. 3190 of 2011 with Civil Application No. 956 of 2011
Decided On: 14.11.2011
Dinesh Vasantrai Bhuta Vs. Vasantben Harvilas Jani
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
G.S. Godbole, J.
0 comments:
Post a Comment