Law: Evidence Act (I of 1872)

Section: 145

  Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 145-Attention of witness must be drawn to those parts of his statement which contradict him-Mere questioning whether particular exhibit constituted his previous statement--Not enough.   A previous admission of a party who has gone into the witness-box on the point in issue and in the witness-box has made a statement inconsistent with the admission or the statement made in the witness-box is such which involves a denial of the previous admission or runs counter to that admission then the previous admission cannot be used as legal evidence in the case against that party unless the attention of the witness during cross-examination was drawn to that statement and he was confronted with specific portions of that statement which were sought to be used as admission. Without complying with the procedure laid down in section 145, Evidence Act, 1872, the admission contained in the previous statement cannot be used as legal evidence against that party.   A witness while deposing in the witness-box may admit, that a particular written statement filed in a previous suit was filed by him but unless specific attention of the witness is drawn to the particular portion therein which runs counter to what he is deposing in the witness-box, copy of such written statement exhibited in the case and brought on record cannot be treated as legal evidence.   Firm Malik Des Raj Faqir Chand v. Firm Piara Lal Aya Ram A I R 1946 Lah. 65 ref.  JUDGMENT This appeal raises a very important point. Plaintiff instituted a suit for a declaration of his title to suit-land and for recovery of possession thereof.   Defendant has traversed plaintiff's case, but the material point in so far as it has a bearing on this appeal is as follows :----   Plaintiff has claimed title from say `X'. `X' had created an interest in favour of `W', who happens to be the father of `X'. Defendant is an under-tenant with whom `W' has settled the land. `W's interest in the land in dispute has been recorded in the settlement records. Plaintiff had to assert, as the basis of his case, that `W's' interest in the suit-land,…