https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313549 Section 85 of the Evidence Act was treated as creating a mandatory presumption that a power of attorney executed before and authenticated by a notary public was duly executed and authenticated. The Court reasoned that notarisation, absent suspicious circumstances, justified an assumption under Section 114 that the notary had satisfied himself as to the executant's identity, and that the object of the provision was to avoid imposing an additional affidavit of identity as a general rule. Rule 748 of Belchambers' Rules and Orders nonetheless allowed the Court to require verification in a particular case, so the proper course was to seek further proof if needed rather than dismiss the application outright. en-us Sat, 22 Jul 1905 00:00:00 +0521 Sat, 20 Apr 2024 11:34:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313549 Section 85 of the Evidence Act was treated as creating a mandatory presumption that a power of attorney executed before and authenticated by a notary public was duly executed and authenticated. The Court reasoned that notarisation, absent suspicious circumstances, justified an assumption under Section 114 that the notary had satisfied himself as to the executant's identity, and that the object of the provision was to avoid imposing an additional affidavit of identity as a general rule. Rule 748 of Belchambers' Rules and Orders nonetheless allowed the Court to require verification in a particular case, so the proper course was to seek further proof if needed rather than dismiss the application outright. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sat, 22 Jul 1905 00:00:00 +0521 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313549