TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1969 (10) TMI 95
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 25 of the Small Cause Courts Act. _ 2. The petitioner Gulla (hereinafter referred to as 'the applicant') filed a suit against the non-applicant Harisingh for recovery of a sum of Rs. 170 on account of the price of a bullock-cart supplied to him on 3-3-65. The non-applicant (defendant) denied the transaction and the trial Court after considering the evidence on record dismissed the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....witness box to deny the transaction in question on oath. In fact he adduced no evidence in support of his case, 4. When a material fact is within the knowledge of a party and he does not go in to the witness box without any plausible reason, an adverse inference must be drawn against him. A presumption must be drawn against a party who having knowledge of the fact in dispute does not go into the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ie against her became conclusive proof by her failure to deny." I entirely agree with the aforesaid observations. 6. The learned trial Judge, therefor, committed a grave error in not taking into account the presumption arising out of non-examination of the defendant in this case while appreciating the evidence on record. This has led to a grave miscarriage of justice. 7. In villages such t....