Presumption of truth

An affidavit is also part of the file which is on non-judicial stamps — The subsequent application and the statement of respondent are also part of official record — It was for the respondent to rebut the presumption of truth attached with the documents but he miserably failed to do so — In presence of these documents the only conclusion which could be drawn was the one which was reached by the learned Custodian — The legal position is that even if a wrong conclusion has been drawn by the tribunal of exclusive jurisdiction cannot be set aside by the High Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction unless the conclusion is based on no evidence or is against evidence on record — In the present case the evidence is overwhelming and each piece of evidence carries presumption of truth — In this situation we fail to understand how the High Court came to the conclusion that there was no proof before the Custodian that the respondent had surrendered his allotment. M. Hanif Khan and another v. Altaf Khan Rathore & another 2000 SCR 464 (C)
No presupmtion of truth is attached to the entries made in ‘Khasargirdawari’, but the fact remains that the documentary evidence whether it be in the shape of ‘Khasargirdawari’ has much more weight than the oral evidence. Manzoor Hussain v. M. Fazal & 8 others 2002 SCR 308 (A)
—Entries of Nikahnama—vis-à-vis—oral evidence—Held: the entries of the Nikahnama carries presumption of truth vis-à-vis oral evidence. Syed Iqbal Shah v. Syeda Tahira Bibi & others 2019 SCR 295 (A)