AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Bennet, J.—This is an application in revision by the Plaintiff widow whose suit has been dismissed by a Small Cause Court. The suit in question was a claim against Defendant No. 1 on account of a bond for Rs. 50. The bond was not forthcoming. Evidence was tendered on behalf of the Plaintiff consisting of a note book of her deceased husband in which there was an entry that Rs. 52 had been advanced to the Defendant No. 1. The lower court stated:
I am not inclined to give a decree on a note book which appears to have been interfered with as many leaves out of it are cut and torn.
The memorandum of appeal sets forth that this note book should have been treated as "conclusive evidence." u/s 32(2) of the Evidence Act a statement of a deceased person is only admissible if made in the ordinary course of business and in particular when it consists of any entry or memorandum made by him in books kept in the ordinary course of business. It is clear that if the note book had many leaves out of it and leaves which were cut and torn it cannot be described as a notebook kept in the ordinary course of business. The note book has been produced and many of the pages are blank, and it is clear that it was not kept in the ordinary course of business. It was, therefore, apparently not admissible in evidence at all, much less was it conclusive proof. In any case its value could be no higher than the statement of the creditor himself if he had been alive. The value to be attached to the note book was merely a question of fact and it cannot be raised in revision in this Court. Accordingly I dismiss this revision with costs.