Kirtan Sahu After Him Uma Sahuani And ... vs Thakur Sahu And Ors. on 24 December, 1971
5-A. The evidence of the above witnesses clearly establishes that Sankar was the son of Dinabandhu and Pata and Sori were his daughters. The entry in the Voters' List (Ext. 3) showing the name of Sankar as the stm of Dinabandhu corroborates the oral evidence led by the plaintiffs. The trial Court did not place any reliance on the Voters' List merely on the ground that two of its pages do not bear any seal of the Panchayat office or Election Office and that though there is a seal of the Sadar' Police Station there was no signature: over it. The Votera' List prepared under the Representation of the People Act is a public record within the meaning of Section 35 of the Evidence Act and a public document within the meaning of Section 74(1)(iii) of the Evidence Act and is admissible in evidence as such. It is not necessary to call in evidence the author thereof or the person supplying the information to prove its genuineness. Vide AIR 1972 Qri 158 (FB) : Kirtan Sahu v. Thakur Sahu. We hold in disagreement with the trial Court that the Voters' List (Ext. 3) is admissible in evidence. The entry in the census register (Ext. 2) mentions the name of one Sagar Swain as the son of Dinabandhu. PW 4 who was the Union President from 1930 to 1954 and Supervisor in 1951-52 stated that the census list was prepared by enumerators. He stated that Sagar Swain is a mistake for Sankar Swain. The trial court did not place any reliance on Ext. 2 on account of such mistake. We see no cogent ground to differ from its finding.