Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 107

2.6. Judicial interpretation of section 9(2) and rule 3, Schedule III.-

The scope of section 9(2) and rule 3, Schedule III has been the subject matter of several decisions. Some of them1 took the view that the idea of 'conclusive proof' is a matter of substantive law arid not a rule of evidence, and hence, rule 3, Schedule III was beyond the scope of section 9(2) and hence ultra vires. Others2 have taken the view that rule 3, Schedule III only provides for rule of evidence and is ultra vires section 9(2). This conflict was recorded by a majority of 3 to 2 by the Supreme Court in favour of the latter view that rule 3, Schedule III, is intra vires.

1. Md. Zhan v. Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1957 AP 97; Sharafat v. Uttar Pradesh, 1960 All 637.

2. AIR 1958 Raj 172; AIR 1969 Born 192; and AIR 1961 Mad 129.

Law of Citizenship Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys