Section 88A in Indian Evidence Act 1872

Title: Presumption as to electronic messages

Description: 1[88A. Presumption as to electronic messages. -- The Court may presume that an electronic message, forwarded by the originator through an electronic mail server to the addressee to whom the message purports to be addressed corresponds with the message as fed into his computer for transmission; but the Court shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent. Explanation. -- For the purposes of this section, the expressions "addressee" and "originator" shall have the same meanings respectively assigned to them in clauses (b) and (za) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000).] 1. Ins. by Act 21 of 2000, s. 92 and the Second Schedule (w.e.f. 17-10-2000).

Title: Presumption as to due execution etc of documents not produced

Description: The Court shall presume that every document, called for and not produced after notice to produce, was attested, stamped and executed in the manner required by law.

Title: Presumption as to documents thirty years old

Description: 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 persons 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. Explanation.-- Documents are said to be in proper custody if they are in the place in which, and under the care of the person with whom, they would naturally be; but no custody is improper if it is proved to have had a legitimate origin, or if the circumstances of the particular case are such as to render such an origin probable. This explanation applies also to section 81. Illustrations (a) A has been in possession of landed property for a long time. He produces from his custody deeds relating to the land showing his titles to it. The custody is proper. (b) A produces deeds relating to landed property of which he is the mortgagee. The mortgagor is in possession. The custody is proper. (c) A, a connection of B, produces deeds relating to lands in Bs possession which were deposited with him by B for safe custody. The custody is proper.

Title: Presumption as to electronic records five years old

Description: 1[90A. Presumption as to electronic records five years old. -- Where any electronic record, purporting or proved to be five years old, is produced from any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume that the 2[electronic signature] which purports to be the 2[electronic signature] of any particular person was so affixed by him or any person authorised by him in this behalf. Explanation. -- Electronic records are said to be in proper custody if they are in the place in which, and under the care of the person with whom, they naturally be; but no custody is improper if it is proved to have had a legitimate origin, or the circumstances of the particular case are such as to render such an origin probable. This Explanation applies also to section 81A.] 1. Ins. by Act 21 of 2000, s. 92 and the Second Schedule (w.e.f. 17-10-2000). 2. Subs. by Act 10 of 2009, s. 52, for "Digital Signature" (w.e.f. 27.10.2009).

Title: Evidence of terms of contracts grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of document

Description: When the terms of a contract, or of a grant, or of any other disposition of property, have been reduced to the form of a document, and in all cases in which any matter is required by law to be reduced to the form of a document, no evidence shall be given in proof of the terms of such contract, grant or other disposition of property, or of such matter, except the document itself, or secondary evidence of its contents in cases in which secondary evidence is admissible under the provisions hereinbefore contained. Exception 1.-- When a public officer is required by law to be appointed in writing, and when it is shown that any particular person has acted as such officer, the writing by which he is appointed need not be proved. Exception 2. -- Wills 1[admitted to probate in 2[India]] may be proved by the probate. Explanation 1.-- This section applies equally to cases in which the contracts, grants or dispositions of property referred to are contained in one document and to cases in which they are contained in more documents than one. Explanation 2. -- Where there are more originals than one, one original only need be proved. Explanation 3. -- The statement, in any document whatever, of a fact other than the facts referred to in this section, shall not preclude the admission of oral evidence as to the same fact Illustrations (a) If a contract be contained in several letters, all the letters in which it is contained must be proved. (b) If a contract is contained in a bill of exchange, the bill of exchange must be proved. (c) If a bill of exchange is drawn in a set of three, one only need be proved. (d) A contracts, in writing, with B, for the delivery of indigo upon certain terms. The contract mentions the fact that B had paid A the price of other indigo contracted for verbally on another occasion. Oral evidence is offered that no payment was made for the other indigo. The evidence is admissible. (e) A gives B a receipt for money paid by B. Oral evidence is offered of the payment. The evidence is admissible. 1. Subs. by Act 18 of 1872, s. 7, for under the Indian Succession Act. 2. Subs. by Act 3 of 1951, s. 3 and the Schedule, for the States.

PART 2 ON PROOF PRESUMPTIONS AS TO DOCUMENTS