Facts of The Case
- A and B are neighbouring landowners.
- A claims a right of way/easement over a portion of B’s property.
- A’s assertion is that this right existed from the time of his great-grandfathers, implying a long-standing customary or prescriptive right.
- There is no direct documentary evidence showing the creation of such an easement at that early period.
- A seeks to rely on his statement about ancient rights, based on family tradition and inherited knowledge.
- B contests the claim, arguing that A’s statement is hearsay and not admissible unless permitted under some exception.
- The Court must determine whether A’s statement, relating to antiquity and family history, is relevant and admissible under the Indian Evidence Act.
Issues in the Case
- Is A’s statement claiming a right of way from his great-grandfathers admissible as evidence?
- What provision of the Indian Evidence Act governs statements regarding ancient rights, traditions, or customs?
- Whether statements based on family tradition or reputation about rights of easement are relevant?
- Does such a statement fall under a “reputation” concerning public or general rights under the Act?
Legal Principles Covered
(i) Section 32(4) — Statements of Persons Who Cannot Be Called as Witnesses
This section allows statements made by persons who are dead or cannot be found regarding “existence of any relationship by blood, marriage or adoption” or matters related to family history.
However, this section mainly deals with genealogical facts and is not directly applicable to easement rights.
(ii) Section 13 — Relevancy of Facts Relating to Rights or Custom
This is the most relevant provision.
Section 13 makes relevant any transaction or instance where:
- A right or custom is claimed or denied,
- Statements relating to such claim or denial are part of historical facts indicating the existence of that right.
Explanation to Section 13
Statements indicating the existence of a right or custom, including ancient assertions, are relevant if they show:
- How the right originated,
- How it has been exercised,
- That it was recognized by neighbours or family members over time.
(iii) Section 48 — Opinions as to General Rights or Custom
Section 48 states:
Opinions expressed by persons who would be likely to know about the existence of a general right or custom, such as family members, village elders, long-term residents etc., are relevant.
This includes:
- Statements about rights of way,
- Easementary rights,
- Customs binding on properties or neighbourhoods.
Thus, A’s assertion that the right of way existed from his great-grandfather’s time can be treated as a “reputation” regarding a general custom or right.
Why Section 48 Applies
The following elements make A’s statement relevant:
- The statement relates to a general right of way/easement.
- It is based on family reputation, passed across generations.
- The existence of such a right is a matter of public or neighbourhood reputation, not merely personal knowledge.
- Section 48 allows such statements as relevant and admissible evidence, even if technically hearsay.
Important Case Laws
- Kali Kinkar v. Sarojini (AIR 1974 SC 1932)
- Rights of way and customs may be proved by long usage and neighbourhood reputation.
- State of Bihar v. Radha Krishna (AIR 1983 SC 684)
- Statements relating to ancient rights may be admissible under Sections 13 and 48.
- Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor (Privy Council)
- Reputation evidence for longstanding rights is admissible if linked to custom or usage.
Possible Judgement
The Court may hold:
- A’s statement regarding his right of way dating back to his great-grandfathers is not direct evidence, but it is relevant under:
- Section 13 (facts relating to rights or customs), and
- Section 48 (opinions of persons likely to know about general rights/customs).
- Such statements fall within the category of reputation evidence regarding longstanding rights.
- The Court may admit A’s statement as supporting evidence, but not as conclusive proof.
- A must still establish the right by long usage, acquiescence, or prescriptive rights under the Easements Act.
- Therefore, A’s statement is admissible and relevant, but additional evidence is needed to finally establish the easement.
About lawgnan
If you want to understand how ancient easement rights, reputation evidence, and long-standing customs are evaluated by Indian courts, Lawgana.in provides complete legal guides, case summaries, and expert explanations in simple language. Whether you’re a student, lawyer, or property owner facing easement disputes, our platform helps you learn the law quickly and accurately. Visit Lawgana.in to explore detailed commentary on Sections 13 and 48 of the Indian Evidence Act, along with real case applications. Stay informed, empowered, and confident with India’s trusted legal knowledge hub.
