Presumption as to documents thirty years old

AIROnline 2020 SC 914 SUPREME COURT R. F. NARIMAN , J. and NAVIN SINHA , J. and KRISHNA MURARI , J. CIVIL APPEAL - 1725 of 2010 D/- 14 - 12 - 2020 IQBAL BASITH and Ors. v. N. SUBBALAKSHMI and Ors. Specific Relief Act (47 of 1963), S.38 - Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S.90, S.114 - Injunction - Defendants acknowledged that they were in ownership and possession of land, which had no concern with suit property, which was situated at distance of 103 feet with other intervening properties - Photocopies of documentary evidence to prove title over suit land, were produced by plaintiffs from proper custody along with explanation for non production of originals - Reports of commissioners confirmed possessory title of plaintiffs along with property tax registers and municipal tax receipts - Plaintiffs having established their title over suit land - Injunction, granted. (Paras 12 , 14 , 15 , 16) Cases Referred Chronological Paras (1999) 3 SCC 457 (1996) 8 SCC 357

13. This Court in Lakhi Baruah vs. Padma Kanta Kalita, (1996) 8 SCC 357 : AIR 1996 SC 1253, with regard to admissibility in evidence of thirty years old documents produced from proper custody observed as follows :

"14. It will be appropriate to refer to Section 90 of the Evidence Act, 1872 which is set out hereunder: "90. Presumption as to documents thirty years old.- Where any document, purporting or proved to be thirty years old, is produced from any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume that the signature and every other part of such document, which purports to be in the handwriting of any particular person, is in that person's handwriting, and, in the case of a document executed or attested, that it was duly executed and attested by the persons by whom it purports to be executed and attested." 15. Section 90 of the Evidence Act, 1872 is founded on necessity and convenience because it is extremely difficult and sometimes not possible to lead evidence to prove handwriting, signature or execution of old documents after lapse of thirty years. In order to obviate such difficulties or improbabilities to prove execution of an old document, Section 90 has been incorporated in the Evidence Act, 1872 which does away with the strict rule of proof of private documents. Presumption of genuineness may be raised if the documents in question is produced from proper custody. It is, however, the discretion of the court to accept the presumption flowing from Section 90. There is, however, no manner of doubt that judicial discretion under Section 90 should not be exercised arbitrarily and not being informed by reasons."