Corroboration of account books can prove liability when ledger entries are supported by independent evidence and testimony.

Entries in regularly kept books of account are relevant, but they do not by themselves fasten liability under the Evidence Act. The article states that the plaintiff's books were found genuine and regularly maintained, and the account entries were supported by vouchers, chits, independent circumstances, and oral testimony on specific transactions. The defendant's denial was not backed by accounts or convincing rebuttal, and no effective cross-examination challenge was made to the plaintiff's evidence. On that factual basis, the transactions were treated as real and honest, sufficient corroboration existed beyond the book entries, and the decree in the plaintiff's favour was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the plaintiff's account books, supported by oral testimony and other corroborative material, were sufficient to prove the debt and sustain a decree under the Evidence Act.

Analysis: Entries in books of account regularly kept in the course of business are relevant, but they cannot by themselves fasten liability. The Court found that the plaintiff's books were genuine and regularly kept, and that the entries were supported by independent circumstances, vouchers, chits, and oral testimony relating to specific items. The defendant's denial was not supported by accounts or convincing rebuttal, and no effective challenge was made in cross-examination to the plaintiff's general and item-wise evidence. The mode of proof, though not ideal, was not objected to at trial and the evidence as a whole established that the transactions were real and honest.

Conclusion: The plaintiff had sufficient corroboration beyond the book entries, and the decree in his favour was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Entries in regularly kept books of account can support liability only when corroborated by independent evidence showing that the transactions recorded are real and honest.

---