AIR 1981 SUPREME COURT 2085 ::(1981) MahLR 95 ::1981 (1) SCC 80 ::(1981) 1 SCR 899 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From : (1966) 70 Cal WN 199)

Hon'ble Judge(s): P. N. Shinghal, D. A. Desai , JJ

(A) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.3— Evidence - Appreciation of proof - Proof of handwriting - Not proof facts in a document. (1966) 70 Cal WN 199, Reversed. Undoubtedly, mere proof of the handwriting of a document would not tantamount to proof of all the contents or the facts stated in the document, if the truth of the facts stated in a document is in issue mere proof of the handwriting and execution of the document would not furnish evidence of the truth of the facts or contents of the document. The truth or otherwise of the facts or contents so stated would have to be proved by admissible evidence i.e. by the evidence of those persons who can vouchsafe for the truth of the facts in issue. Held that the letter dated 10th July, 1961 and the cable dated 13th July, 1961 sent by the appellant and received by the respondent, would show that the arbitration agreement to refer disputes to a foreign arbitral tribunal in the draft agreement was not acceptable to the appellant though the other terms were acceptable. The appellant repudiated the arbitration agreement soon after the agreement was signed when the Managing Director of the appellant was in Belgrade and took the follow up action by sending a cable reiterating and repeating the objection immediately after his return to India. In this case one J who filed an affidavit on behalf ....