TMI Blog1926 (11) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claims to be the legitimate son of the deceased Sheik Moideen by one Ma Kin; and that neither of them has any claim to any portion of or interest in the estate of the deceased. Notwithstanding which, as she alleges, the defendants have been withholding the property of the deceased from her. The defendants filed a joint written statement in which they denied that the plaintiff was heir to the estate, and pleaded that prior to his death the deceased divorced the plaintiff according to Mahomedan Law, and that the said divorce was communicated to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff thereafter ceased to be the wife of the deceased if she was legally married to him at any time. They also pleaded that as widow and son of the deceased they were his o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng of Section 63 of the Act, which so far as material, is as follows: Secondary evidence means and includes- * * * oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself seen it. 6. In their Lordships' opinion the learned Judges were right in holding that this means that the oral evidence of the contents of the document must be given by some person who has seen those contents, that is to say, who has read the document. Evidence that the witness saw the document and heard it read out by someone else is only hearsay so far as the contents are concerned, and does not fulfil the requirements of Section 60 as to oral evidence generally: Oral evidence must in all cases whatever be direct; that is to sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usion that there was no sufficient evidence of any such oral divorce, and they accordingly reversed the judgment of the lower Court and gave the plaintiff a decree. 10. There is no doubt the evidence of two witnesses on the record that the deceased on this occasion uttered three times the word talak which, if uttered once, would be sufficient to constitute an oral divorce, and that he also told the witnesses that the document was a talaknama or divorce document. As to this, the learned Judges have held that the evidence as to the use of the word talak by the deceased was not reliable and that it was not proved that the deceased told the witnesses that he had divorced his wife, or indeed that he had any intention of effecting a divorc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
