In Brief
The plaintiff sought partition of property, claiming he was a minor when his father died in 1963 and therefore entitled to a share despite executing a release deed. He relied on a school leaving certificate to prove his date of birth. The trial court and first appellate court both rejected this evidence, finding the plaintiff was an adult at the relevant time and the release deed valid. The High Court reversed this on a second appeal. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit, holding that the High Court erred in reappreciating evidence and interfering with concurrent findings of fact. A school leaving certificate cannot prove date of birth without testimony from the school official or persons with special knowledge. Once two courts reach a finding that is not perverse and rests on material evidence, the High Court cannot interfere merely to take a different view.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.