In Brief
The appellants challenged a determination that their family temple was a public religious endowment rather than private property. The High Court affirmed this finding based on public visitation and an entry in the official Register of Endowments. The Supreme Court held that while official documents carry a presumption of validity, this presumption is rebuttable by convincing evidence. Since the witness who introduced the endowment register entry could not prove it was prepared following the legally prescribed procedure, and oral evidence was evenly balanced, the Court set aside the High Court's judgment. The Court remitted the matter for fresh adjudication by the competent authority, directing both parties to adduce full evidence on whether the endowment was validly registered under the applicable statutory procedure.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.