Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Referring to this judgment, it was observed by one of us, who was a party to the Full Bench decision, that that decision, i.e., ILR 39 Mad 683 : (AIR 1916 Mad 263) illustrates the ride as to the burden of proof, namely, "that in the absence of evidence to the contrary it should be assumed that the minor inams were anterior to the grant of the village." It was also pointed out there that a similar assumption was made by a Bench of the Madras High Court in Baoiraju v. Vallayya, (1947) 2 Mad L.f 293 : (AIK 1948 Mad 213). In the latter case, it was not possible to say from an examination of the documents as to which of the grants was earlier and yet it was assumed that (he grant of mokhasa was subsequent to the grant of the minor inarns.