In Brief
A landowner sued a man he claimed he had appointed as a property manager, seeking to evict him and recover accounts. The man countered that he was a tenant paying traditional agricultural rent. The High Court accepted his defence based on oral witness testimony. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that while revenue records showing the owner's possession carry a statutory presumption of truth, this presumption can only be challenged with solid documentary evidence—not mere oral testimony. Since the man failed to produce credible documents proving a tenancy agreement, the Court upheld the owner's right to possession and dismissed the appeal against the manager's removal."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.