Practice paper — BSA Chapter V — Of Documentary Evidence
50 questions · answer key at the end · no time limit · 187 more on the site
samvidhan.co.in
1.What does Section 56 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 permit to be proved?
- (A) The contents of documents.
- (B) The physical existence of documents.
- (C) The signatures and execution of documents.
- (D) The legal admissibility of documents.
2.Does Section 56 allow the contents of a document to be proved simultaneously by both primary and secondary evidence?
- (A) Yes — it requires both primary and secondary evidence together.
- (B) Yes — but only if both forms of evidence are available.
- (C) No — it prohibits the use of secondary evidence.
- (D) No — it permits either primary or secondary evidence (i.e., one of the two).
3.An electronic or digital record is produced from proper custody and presented in court. According to Section 57, when is such an electronic or digital record primary evidence?
- (A) Only if printed and signed by an official.
- (B) Never; electronic records are always secondary evidence.
- (C) It is primary evidence unless it is disputed.
- (D) Only when produced with a certificate under statute.
4.Does Section 58 treat oral admissions as secondary evidence?
- (A) No, oral admissions are not included
- (B) Yes, oral admissions are included as secondary evidence
- (C) Only if the oral admission is corroborated by a document
- (D) Only if reduced to writing and certified
5.Are "counterparts of documents" treated as secondary evidence against the parties who executed those documents under Section 58?
- (A) Yes, counterparts are secondary evidence as to all parties
- (B) No — counterparts are secondary evidence only as against parties who did not execute them
- (C) Yes, but only when the original is lost
- (D) Only if the counterparts are certified copies
6.Does Section 59 itself enumerate the exceptional cases where primary evidence need not be used?
- (A) Yes, it lists the exceptional cases within the same sentence.
- (B) Yes, it provides a full list of exceptions in the same section.
- (C) It depends on judicial interpretation.
- (D) No, it refers to cases that are to be mentioned hereinafter (i.e., later), not enumerated in this sentence.
7.If the originals consist of numerous accounts and the fact to be proved is the general result of the whole collection, what form of secondary evidence does Section 60 permit?
- (A) Only a certified copy of each original
- (B) Evidence by any person who has examined them and who is skilled in their examination
- (C) Only a written admission by the party
- (D) No secondary evidence is admissible
8.According to Section 61, an electronic or digital record shall have the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as which of the following?
- (A) Other electronic records
- (B) Oral testimony
- (C) Other document
- (D) Only government-issued documents
9.Does Section 61 make electronic or digital records automatically admissible without satisfying other evidentiary requirements?
- (A) Yes—automatically admissible in all circumstances.
- (B) No—it prevents denial solely because the record is electronic and equates its legal effect to other documents subject to section 63; other admissibility requirements may still apply.
- (C) Yes, but only if signed digitally.
- (D) No—electronic records remain inadmissible.
10.When is a computer output admissible in any proceedings without further proof or production of the original under Section 63(1)?
- (A) Only if the original electronic device is produced in court.
- (B) Only if the producing computer belongs to the accused or respondent.
- (C) Only if a government authority certifies the record.
- (D) When the conditions mentioned in Section 63 relating to the information and the computer are satisfied.
11.Before secondary evidence of a document's contents is given, what must the party proposing to give such evidence ordinarily do under Section 64?
- (A) Previously give notice to the party in whose possession or power the document is, or to his advocate or representative
- (B) Serve notice on the Court only
- (C) Obtain written permission from the Court
- (D) File a certified copy of the document with the secondary evidence
12.A party's agent has the original document in his personal custody but has not brought it into Court. Under Section 64, is prior notice to produce required before secondary evidence is given?
- (A) No; possession by the agent anywhere removes the notice requirement
- (B) No; because the agent's knowledge of the document suffices to dispense with notice
- (C) Yes; notice is required unless another proviso exception applies, because clause (d) exempts only when the adverse party or his agent has the original in Court
- (D) Yes; but only if the Court has prescribed a specific time period for the notice
13.If only a portion of a document is alleged to be in A's handwriting, what does Section 65 require to be proved?
- (A) That the entire document is in A's handwriting.
- (B) That the document was created on a particular date.
- (C) That the handwriting of only the portion alleged to be A's must be proved to be in A's handwriting.
- (D) That the verbal contents of the portion are accurate.
14.Which situation is expressly excluded from the proof requirement under Section 66?
- (A) When the subscriber is a government official.
- (B) When the electronic record is older than a year.
- (C) When it is a secure electronic signature.
- (D) When the signature is handwritten on a printed copy.
15.Under Section 67, if a document is required by law to be attested, what must ordinarily be done before it is used as evidence (assuming an attesting witness is alive and capable)?
- (A) Produce the original registration certificate only
- (B) Obtain a judicial order authorising its use
- (C) Call at least one attesting witness for the purpose of proving its execution
- (D) Have the parties file affidavits of execution
16.If a non-will document has been registered but the execution by the person by whom it purports to have been executed is specifically denied, what does Section 67 require?
- (A) An attesting witness must be called to prove execution despite registration
- (B) Registration alone conclusively proves execution, so no witness is needed
- (C) The document may be used only if the plaintiff files a fresh affidavit
- (D) A magistrate must first determine the validity of the registration
17.If the attestation on a document is entirely typewritten and no attesting witness can be found, can the requirement of Section 68 be satisfied?
- (A) Yes — typewritten attestation is equivalent to handwriting for this purpose.
- (B) Yes — because only the executant's signature matters.
- (C) No — because Section 68 requires that the attestation of at least one attesting witness be in his handwriting.
- (D) No — because Section 68 requires at least two attesting witnesses' handwriting.
18.Does Section 69 apply where the attested document is one that the law requires to be attested?
- (A) No — it does not apply to documents required by law to be attested.
- (B) Yes — it applies even though it be a document required by law to be attested.
- (C) Only if the attestation is by a public official.
- (D) Only if the party's admission is made in writing before a magistrate.
19.According to Section 70, what happens if an attesting witness denies the execution of a document?
- (A) Its execution may be proved by other evidence.
- (B) The document is automatically declared invalid.
- (C) Only the attesting witness's testimony can be used to prove execution.
- (D) The execution must be proved exclusively by a public officer.
20.Which statement correctly captures how Section 70 treats an attesting witness who denies execution versus one who does not recollect it?
- (A) Denial permits other evidence, while lack of recollection does not.
- (B) Both denial and lack of recollection permit proving execution by other evidence.
- (C) Denial bars any further proof, while lack of recollection requires new witnesses.
- (D) Only a judicially certified denial triggers the provision.
21.Does Section 71 apply to a document when a statute specifically requires attestation for that class of document?
- (A) Yes — Section 71 applies regardless of statutory requirements.
- (B) Yes — but only with the court's permission.
- (C) No — Section 71 applies only to documents not required by law to be attested.
- (D) Only if both parties consent to treat it as unattested.
22.Does Section 72 apply to finger impressions?
- (A) No, the section applies only to signatures, writings and seals.
- (B) Yes, and without any modification to the provision.
- (C) Yes, but only with any necessary modifications.
- (D) Only to finger impressions taken by police authorities.
23.Under Section 73 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, to ascertain whether a digital signature is that of the person by whom it purports to have been affixed, the Court may direct which of the following to produce the Digital Signature Certificate?
- (A) Only the person who purportedly affixed the signature
- (B) That person or the Controller or the Certifying Authority
- (C) Any other person in possession of the certificate
- (D) Only the Controller of Certifying Authorities
24.Which of the following is an essential requirement under Section 73 for the Court to direct application of a key to verify a digital signature?
- (A) That the private key corresponding to the signature be produced
- (B) That the signer appear in person before the Court
- (C) That the document be a public document
- (D) That the public key be listed in the Digital Signature Certificate
25.A private individual's will is held as part of a public record in a State archive. Under Section 74, is that document a public document?
- (A) No — it remains private because it was created by a private individual
- (B) No — only documents of public officers can be public
- (C) Yes — public records kept in any State or Union territory of private documents are public documents
- (D) Yes — but only if the will records an act of the sovereign authority
26.What specific statement and particulars must be written at the foot of the copy to make it a certified copy under Section 75?
- (A) Only the officer's signature
- (B) Only the date
- (C) A certificate that it is a true copy, dated and subscribed by the officer with his name and official title
- (D) A notarisation by a public notary
27.Under Section 76 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, certified copies may be produced to prove which of the following?
- (A) The authenticity of the public document's signature
- (B) The contents of the public documents or parts of them
- (C) The identity of the person who created the document
- (D) The truth of facts asserted in the document
28.Do the rules of Section 76 allow producing certified copies to prove the contents of private (non-public) documents?
- (A) Yes — certified copies are allowed for any document
- (B) Yes — but only if notarised
- (C) Yes — if the private document was later declared public
- (D) No — Section 76 refers to public documents or parts of public documents only
29.How may the proceedings of a municipal or local body in a State be proved under Section 77(e)?
- (A) Only by a copy certified by the legal keeper of the proceedings
- (B) Either by a copy certified by the legal keeper of the proceedings or by a printed book purporting to be published by the authority of such body
- (C) Only by a copy certified under the seal of a Notary Public
- (D) Only by journals of the State Legislature
30.What additional presumption does Section 78(2) create regarding the officer who signs or certifies such a document?
- (A) That the signature was notarized by a public notary.
- (B) That the officer held the official character he claims in the paper when he signed it.
- (C) That the contents of the document are factually true.
- (D) That the officer is presently holding the office mentioned in the document.
31.Under Section 79 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, if a document purports to be a record of evidence signed by a Judge or Magistrate, the Court shall presume that the document is —
- (A) Genuine
- (B) Admissible only if the original is produced
- (C) A copy requiring secondary evidence
- (D) Conclusive proof of the truth of all facts stated
32.Section 79 covers documents purporting to be statements or confessions "taken in accordance with law" and purporting to be signed by a Judge, Magistrate, or authorised officer. Which of the following best describes the combined presumptions the Court must make under that section?
- (A) Only that the document is genuine
- (B) That the document is genuine and the signer actually made any statements as to circumstances, but not that it was duly taken
- (C) That the document is genuine; any statements as to the circumstances made by the signer are true; and that such evidence, statement or confession was duly taken
- (D) That the document establishes the guilt of the person who made the statement
33.A law directs a private person to maintain a record. The record is produced from the place where that person keeps it and is kept substantially in the form required by law. Under Section 80, will the Court presume the record's genuineness?
- (A) No — Section 80 applies only to Official Gazettes and newspapers
- (B) Only if the record is notarised
- (C) Yes — the Court shall presume its genuineness when such a document is kept substantially in the form required by law and produced from proper custody
- (D) Yes — but only if produced by a public officer
34.According to the Explanation to Section 81, when are electronic records said to be in 'proper custody'?
- (A) When they are stored on any secure server regardless of who looks after them.
- (B) When they are in the place in which, and looked after by the person with whom such document is required to be kept.
- (C) When they bear a digital signature from the issuing authority.
- (D) When they are replicated at multiple locations to ensure redundancy.
35.Under Section 82 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, when will the court presume that a map or plan was made by the stated authority and is accurate?
- (A) When the map or plan purports to be made by the authority of the Central Government or any State Government
- (B) When the map or plan is prepared by a private surveyor and filed in court
- (C) When the map or plan was produced for the purposes of any cause
- (D) When the map or plan is certified by a local municipal officer
36.If a map purports to be made by the authority of the Central Government and was not prepared specifically for any cause, what does Section 82 require the court to presume?
- (A) That the map is admissible but its accuracy must be proved by the party producing it
- (B) That the map was made by a private surveyor under government supervision
- (C) That the map should be disregarded unless corroborated by oral evidence
- (D) That the map was made by the Central Government authority and is accurate
37.A privately printed volume reproduces the statutes of a foreign country but does not purport to have been printed under that country's government authority. Under Section 83, will the Court presume its genuineness?
- (A) Yes, because it contains the laws
- (B) No, because it does not purport to be printed under government authority
- (C) Yes, but only if a court certifies it later
- (D) No, unless it also contains reports of decisions
38.Which of the following persons is explicitly mentioned in Section 84 as an authenticating authority whose authentication gives rise to the statutory presumption?
- (A) Sub-Registrar
- (B) Police Officer
- (C) Notary Public
- (D) Panchayat Official
39.Under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, what specific fact does the Court 'shall presume' about an electronic record purporting to be an agreement containing the electronic or digital signature of the parties?
- (A) That the electronic signatures authenticate the identity of the signatories.
- (B) That the agreement is valid and enforceable in all respects.
- (C) That the agreement was concluded by affixing the electronic or digital signature of the parties.
- (D) That the parties physically met to conclude the agreement.
40.Section 85 presumes an agreement was 'concluded by affixing the electronic or digital signature of the parties.' Which of the following descriptions best matches what is directly presumed by the provision?
- (A) That a third party affixed signatures on behalf of the parties.
- (B) That the agreement was concluded by affixing the electronic or digital signature of the parties themselves.
- (C) That the content of the agreement is substantively fair to both parties.
- (D) That the parties later ratified the agreement by conduct.
41.How does Section 86 treat its presumptions when evidence to the contrary is produced in a proceeding?
- (A) The presumptions are conclusive and cannot be rebutted by contrary evidence.
- (B) The presumptions are rebuttable — they apply unless contrary is proved.
- (C) Contrary evidence only shifts the burden of proof but does not rebut the presumptions.
- (D) Contrary evidence must come only from the subscriber to be effective.
42.Which of the following is expressly excluded from the Court's presumption of correctness under Section 87?
- (A) Information specified as subscriber information which has not been verified
- (B) All information listed in the certificate once accepted
- (C) The fact of subscriber acceptance itself
- (D) The court's ability to hear evidence
43.Under Section 88(1) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the Court may presume that a document purporting to be a certified copy of a foreign judicial record is what?
- (A) Genuine and accurate
- (B) Admissible without proof
- (C) Signed by the foreign judicial officer
- (D) Authenticated under the Hague Convention
44.If a foreign document is certified in a manner which a Central Government representative certifies to be commonly in use in that country, what precisely may the Court presume under Section 88(1)?
- (A) That the document is admissible in evidence only
- (B) That the document was issued by the highest court of that country
- (C) That the document is accurate but not necessarily genuine
- (D) That the document is genuine and accurate
45.Would Section 89's presumption apply to a published map whose statements are irrelevant to the facts in issue?
- (A) Yes, it applies to all published maps regardless of relevance.
- (B) No, it applies only where the map's statements are relevant facts.
- (C) Yes, provided the map is produced for inspection.
- (D) Only if the map is accompanied by a book referred to by the Court.
46.Which of the following is expressly excluded from presumption under Section 90 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023?
- (A) That the substance of the message corresponds to what was fed into a computer.
- (B) That the Court shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent.
- (C) That the message was forwarded through an electronic mail server.
- (D) That the addressee is the person to whom the message purports to be addressed.
47.Under Section 91 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, what presumption does the Court make about a document that was called for and not produced after notice to produce?
- (A) That it was attested, stamped and executed in the manner required by law.
- (B) That it is inadmissible in evidence.
- (C) That it was forged.
- (D) That it was lost or destroyed.
48.Which condition must be satisfied for the presumption in Section 91 to arise?
- (A) The document must have been destroyed by court order.
- (B) The document must be expressly referred to in a written contract.
- (C) The document must be more than twenty years old.
- (D) The document must have been called for and not produced after notice to produce.
49.Illustration (a) to Section 92 states: A has been in possession of landed property for a long time and produces from his custody deeds relating to the land showing his titles. According to the provision, is the custody in this illustration considered proper?
- (A) Yes, the custody shall be proper
- (B) No, long possession alone is insufficient
- (C) Only if the deeds are registered
- (D) Only if the mortgagor consents
50.According to Section 93, when may the Court presume that an electronic signature was affixed by the person or someone authorised by him?
- (A) When the electronic record is produced from any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper
- (B) When the signature is witnessed by a third party
- (C) Only when the producer files an affidavit of authenticity
- (D) Only when the record is accompanied by a digital certificate
Answer key
Explanations
- 1. (A) Section 56 states: 'The contents of documents may be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence.' Thus the provision authorises proof of the contents of documents.
- 2. (D) Section 56 states that 'The contents of documents may be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence.' The use of the word 'either' indicates proof by one of the two methods rather than requiring both.
- 3. (C) Explanation 5 provides that "Where an electronic or digital record is produced from proper custody, such electronic and digital record is primary evidence unless it is disputed." Therefore it is primary so long as it is not disputed.
- 4. (B) Clause (vi) of Section 58 explicitly includes "oral admissions" among kinds of secondary evidence. The provision does not make inclusion conditional on writing or corroboration in that clause.
- 5. (B) Clause (iv) specifies "counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not execute them;" by contrast, counterparts are not described as secondary evidence against parties who executed the documents.
- 6. (D) The provision says "except in the cases hereinafter mentioned," indicating that the specific exceptions are to be provided later and are not enumerated in this sentence.
- 7. (B) Clause (g) and its Explanation (iv) allow evidence as to the general result of numerous documents to be given by any person who has examined them and is skilled in their examination. A skilled examiner's evidence is thus admissible.
- 8. (C) Section 61 explicitly provides that an electronic or digital record shall, subject to section 63, have the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as other document.
- 9. (B) Section 61 bars denying admissibility merely because a record is electronic and declares equal legal effect subject to section 63, but it does not state that all other evidentiary requirements are removed; therefore automatic admissibility in all circumstances is not provided by the text.
- 10. (D) Section 63(1) states that a computer output shall be deemed a document and admissible without further proof or production of the original if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and the computer in question.
- 11. (A) Section 64 requires that the party proposing to give secondary evidence "has previously given to the party in whose possession or power the document is, or to his advocate or representative, such notice to produce it." This is the ordinary requirement before secondary evidence is admissible.
- 12. (C) Section 64's proviso (d) exempts notice only "when the adverse party or his agent has the original in Court." If the agent merely has the document outside Court, the ordinary requirement of prior notice applies unless some other proviso exception fits the situation.
- 13. (C) Section 65 requires proof of 'the handwriting of so much of the document as is alleged to be in that person's handwriting.' Therefore, where only a portion is alleged to be in A's handwriting, only that alleged portion's handwriting must be proved to be A's.
- 14. (C) Section 66 begins with the qualifying phrase: "Except in the case of a secure electronic signature," indicating that the duty to prove the signature does not apply when the signature is a secure electronic signature.
- 15. (C) Section 67 states that such a document shall not be used as evidence until one attesting witness at least has been called for the purpose of proving its execution, if there be an attesting witness alive and capable of giving evidence.
- 16. (A) The proviso to Section 67 says the exception for registered documents applies unless its execution by the person is specifically denied; if execution is specifically denied, calling an attesting witness is necessary despite registration.
- 17. (C) Section 68 mandates that, if no attesting witness can be found, it must be proved that the attestation of at least one attesting witness is in his handwriting. A wholly typewritten attestation would not satisfy the requirement that the attestation be in the attesting witness's handwriting.
- 18. (B) The provision explicitly states the admission shall be sufficient proof 'though it be a document required by law to be attested,' meaning it applies even when law requires attestation. It does not add conditions about public officials or magistrates.
- 19. (A) Section 70 states: 'If the attesting witness denies or does not recollect the execution of the document, its execution may be proved by other evidence.' Therefore, other evidence may be used to prove execution; the provision does not declare automatic invalidity or limit proof to the attesting witness.
- 20. (B) Section 70 explicitly treats both situations together: 'If the attesting witness denies or does not recollect the execution of the document, its execution may be proved by other evidence.' Thus both denial and lack of recollection permit proof by other evidence.
- 21. (C) Section 71 applies to 'An attested document not required by law to be attested.' If the law requires attestation, the provision does not apply; it is limited to documents for which attestation is not legally required.
- 22. (C) Section 72(3) expressly provides that the section applies also, with any necessary modifications, to finger impressions. Thus finger impressions are covered but subject to necessary modifications.
- 23. (B) Clause (a) expressly authorises the Court to direct "that person or the Controller or the Certifying Authority to produce the Digital Signature Certificate." The provision names those three categories as the persons who may be directed to produce the certificate.
- 24. (D) Clause (b) requires applying "the public key listed in the Digital Signature Certificate" to verify the digital signature, making the public key's presence in the certificate an essential precondition. The provision does not mention producing a private key, the signer's personal appearance, or the document being public.
- 25. (C) Section 74(1)(b) makes public records kept in any State or Union territory of private documents public documents. Therefore a private individual's will kept as a public record in a State archive is treated as a public document.
- 26. (C) The section requires 'together with a certificate written at the foot of such copy that it is a true copy... and such certificate shall be dated and subscribed by such officer with his name and his official title.' Therefore the certificate with date and the officer's name and title is required.
- 27. (B) Section 76 states: 'Such certified copies may be produced in proof of the contents of the public documents or parts of the public documents of which they purport to be copies.' Thus certified copies are for proving the contents, not expressly for proving authenticity, identity or factual truth.
- 28. (D) The provision specifically refers to 'public documents or parts of the public documents.' It therefore applies to public documents and does not extend, on its face, to non-public documents.
- 29. (B) Section 77(e) provides two alternatives: by a copy of such proceedings certified by the legal keeper thereof, or by a printed book purporting to be published by the authority of such body. Either method suffices under the provision.
- 30. (B) Section 78(2) expressly provides that the Court shall presume the officer by whom the document purports to be signed held the official character he claims when he signed it. It does not presume notarization, present office-holding, or substantive truth of contents.
- 31. (A) The provision states that the Court shall presume that "the document is genuine" (item (i)). It does not say anything about original/secondary evidence or that the document is conclusive proof of all facts.
- 32. (C) Section 79 expressly states the Court shall presume (i) the document is genuine; (ii) any statements as to the circumstances made by the person signing it are true; and (iii) such evidence, statement or confession was duly taken. It does not equate to proof of guilt.
- 33. (C) Section 80 extends the presumption to every document purporting to be a document directed by any law to be kept by any person, provided it is kept substantially in the form required by law and is produced from proper custody. Therefore the Court shall presume its genuineness in those circumstances.
- 34. (B) The Explanation expressly defines proper custody: electronic records are said to be in proper custody if they are in the place in which, and looked after by the person with whom such document is required to be kept. This is the statutory test for proper custody in Section 81.
- 35. (A) Section 82 states that the Court shall presume that maps or plans purporting to be made by the authority of the Central Government or any State Government were so made and are accurate. The presumption specifically attaches to maps/plans that purport to be made by government authority.
- 36. (D) Section 82 provides that the Court shall presume maps or plans purporting to be made by the authority of the Central Government or any State Government were so made, and are accurate. Absent the proviso (i.e. not made for the purposes of a cause), the court presumes both maker and accuracy.
- 37. (B) Section 83 limits the presumption for books of laws to those "purporting to be printed or published under the authority of the Government of any country." A privately printed volume that does not so purport is therefore not covered by that part of the provision.
- 38. (C) The provision specifically lists 'a Notary Public' among the authorities. Other options such as Sub-Registrar, Police Officer, or Panchayat Official are not mentioned in the text.
- 39. (C) Section 85 states the Court shall presume such an electronic record 'was so concluded by affixing the electronic or digital signature of the parties.' It does not state other matters like authentication of identity, overall validity, or physical meeting.
- 40. (B) The text expressly presumes the agreement 'was so concluded by affixing the electronic or digital signature of the parties.' It does not speak to third-party affixation, substantive fairness, or later ratification by conduct.
- 41. (B) Both sub-sections begin with the phrase that the Court shall presume unless the contrary is proved, which means these presumptions are rebuttable. The text explicitly allows contrary proof to defeat the presumptions.
- 42. (A) Section 87 contains an explicit exception: the Court's presumption does not apply to information specified as subscriber information which has not been verified. Other items listed are not identified as exclusions in the provision.
- 43. (A) Section 88(1) expressly states that the Court may presume such a document is "genuine and accurate." The provision does not say anything about automatic admissibility, signatures, or Hague authentication.
- 44. (D) Section 88(1) specifically allows the Court to presume that such a certified copy is "genuine and accurate" when the certification manner is so certified by the Central Government representative. The provision does not limit the presumption to admissibility, court level, or only accuracy.
- 45. (B) The provision qualifies published maps or charts by saying "the statements of which are relevant facts," so the presumption applies only where the map's statements are relevant. Irrelevant statements are outside this provision.
- 46. (B) The provision explicitly states that "the Court shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such message was sent." Thus the Court may not presume the sender's identity, even though it may presume correspondence of the message content.
- 47. (A) Section 91 states: 'The Court shall presume that every document, called for and not produced after notice to produce, was attested, stamped and executed in the manner required by law.' The provision therefore presumes proper attestation, stamping and execution.
- 48. (D) Section 91 specifically says the presumption applies to 'every document, called for and not produced after notice to produce.' None of the other conditions are mentioned in the text.
- 49. (A) Illustration (a) explicitly states that where A has been in possession for a long time and produces deeds from his custody, 'The custody shall be proper.' Therefore such custody is proper under the section.
- 50. (A) Section 93 states the presumption applies where the five-year-old electronic record is "produced from any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper." The provision does not make other conditions in the text.