https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287961 A permanent grant of britti and a charge on the estate were not proved because the evidence showed only long-standing annual payments and worship services, with no reliable documentary basis for an original grant or charge and no justified presumption of a lost grant. Family tradition and hearsay were inadmissible to prove the claim because the evidence statute was treated as exhaustive, leaving no power to admit such material outside its express exceptions. The claim therefore failed for want of admissible proof, and the decree for the plaintiffs could not stand. en-us Mon, 11 Nov 1940 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 May 2020 10:57:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287961 A permanent grant of britti and a charge on the estate were not proved because the evidence showed only long-standing annual payments and worship services, with no reliable documentary basis for an original grant or charge and no justified presumption of a lost grant. Family tradition and hearsay were inadmissible to prove the claim because the evidence statute was treated as exhaustive, leaving no power to admit such material outside its express exceptions. The claim therefore failed for want of admissible proof, and the decree for the plaintiffs could not stand. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 11 Nov 1940 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287961