Section 83

Courts in India often need to know what the law is in another country — for example, in cases involving foreign contracts, marriages, or inheritance. Proving the authenticity of every foreign law book through witnesses or certificates would be slow and often impossible. This provision, inherited from Section 87 of the old Indian Evidence Act, 1872, saves time by letting courts presume that official-looking government law books and court report volumes are genuine, shifting the burden to the other side if they wish to challenge it.

Under the predecessor provision (Section 87 of the 1872 Act), Indian courts have generally held that the presumption applies only to books that appear official on their face — such as government gazettes, statute books, or recognized law reports — and does not extend to private commentaries or unofficial compilations. Courts have also clarified that this is a rebuttable presumption: if a party produces credible evidence that the book is inaccurate, outdated, or not authoritative, the presumption can be displaced.

• Myth: This rule means the foreign law in the book is automatically correct and final.
  Fact: The presumption is only about the book being genuine (really published by that government), not that its legal content is unchallengeable — courts can still hear arguments about how the law should be interpreted or whether it's outdated.
• Myth: Any book claiming to discuss foreign law qualifies for this presumption.
  Fact: Courts have read this narrowly to cover only books that appear to be officially printed or published under a government's authority, not private textbooks or commentaries.