STATE Vs. JATAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed on behalf of the Government against a decision of the Deputy Collector, Jagir, Nagaur dated 15. 11. 58 under sec. 39 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act. The contention of the learned Government Advocate is that a sum of Rs. 34-49 and Rs. 175-62 allowed by the lower court on account of grazing dues and income from non-agricultural land respectively, was without any evidence on record. It was pointed out that the decision was based entirely on entries said to have been made in a Bahi Khata maintained by the Jagirdar which have not been proved by any corroborative evidence in accordance with the provision of sec. 34 of the Indian Evidence Act. The learned counsel for the respondent however, urged that the Jagirdar himself had come into the witness box and his statement was in itself enough to prove the authenticity of the Bahi Khata as well as the amount claimed by him. It is a well-known rule of law which the Board of Revenue reaffirmed in many earlier decisions that where an entry in a book of accounts is used to charge a person with liability, corroboration is necessary. What sec. 34 really requires is that the entry should not stand alone. There must be some other evidence to support it. A mere account book, without more, dose not prove anything. Further, more proof of existence of certain entries in books of account even if they are kept in the ordinary course of business, is not sufficient to charge a person with liability. In the present case we are satisfied that the essential ingredients of sec. 34 of the Indian Evidence Act have been ignored by the lower court. THIS being so, we allow this appeal, set aside the order of the lower court and direct that the case be remanded back to it with the direction that it should proceed to reexamine the claim in the light of the observations made above. .