Indian Evidence Act, 1872 · Chapter II: Of the Relevancy of Facts · Judgments of courts of justice when relevant
Section 41: Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to matters and proceedings from before that date, as the repealing law provides.
In plain words
A final judgment of a competent court in probate, matrimonial, admiralty or insolvency jurisdiction that gives or takes away a legal character, or declares someone entitled to a legal character or a thing absolutely (not just against a specific person), is relevant, and is conclusive proof of that character or title from the time it declares.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
A final judgment, order or decree of a competent Court, in the exercise of probate, matrimonial, admiralty or insolvency jurisdiction, which confers upon or takes away from any person any legal character, or which declares any person to be entitled to any such character, or to be entitled to any specific thing, not as against any specified person but absolutely, is relevant when the existence of any such legal character, or the title of any such person to any such thing, is relevant. Such judgment, order or decree is conclusive proof –– that any legal character which it confers accrued at the time when such judgment, order or decree came into operation; that any legal character, to which it declares any such person to be entitled, accrued to that person at the time when such judgment [order or decree] declares it to have accrued to that person; that any legal character which it takes away from any such person ceased at the time from which such judgment, [order or decree] declared that it had ceased or should cease; and that anything to which it declares any person to be so entitled was the property of that person at the time from which such judgment, [order or decree] declares that it had been or should be his property.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 41
- Ajit Kumar v. State NCT of Delhi and Anr
- Vijeyesh Pande v. State & Anr
- Shiv Raj Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors
-
Bharat Sher Singh Kalsia v. State of Bihar & Anr.
Whether the High Court was justified in rejecting the prayer for quashing of the FIR registered u/ss. 409, 467, 468, 471 and 420 IPC against the vendee for the criminal acts, misuse of power of attorney-PoA,…
- Bimalendu Ghosh Dastidar v. State & Ors
- Sanjay Mehra v. Sharad Mehra & Ors
- Aparna Ajinkya Firodia v. Ajinkya Arun Firodia
- Surajit Chatterjee v. State & Anr
- Ashish Chauhan v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr
- Vidya Drolia and Others v. Durga Trading Corporation
- Satish Chander Ahuja v. Sneha Ahuja
- Avitel Post Studioz Limited & Ors. v. Hsbc Pi Holdings (Mauritius) Limited
- V. Kalyanaswamy (D) by Lrs. & Anr. v. L. Bakthavatsalam (D) by Lrs. & Ors.
- Guru Granth Saheb Sthan Meerghat Vanaras v. Ved Prakash and Ors.
- Kishan Singh (D) Through Lrs. v. Gurpal Singh & Ors.
- Ramesh Duti & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
- Syed Askari Hadi Ali Augustine Imam & Anr. v. State (Delhi Admn.) & Anr.
- Jitendra Panchal v. Intelligence Officer, Ncb & Anr.
- Satrucharla Vijaya Rama Raju v. Nimmaka Jaya Raju and Ors.
- Crystal Developers Etc. Etc. v. Smt. Asha Lata Ghosh (Dead) Through Lrs. and Ors., Etc. Etc.
- K.G. Premshanker v. Inspector of Police and Anr.
- Delhi Administration v. Gurdip Singh Uban and Ors. Etc.
- Commissioner_ of Income Tax, Kanpur v. Kamla Town Trust
- Smt. Chand Dhawan v. Jawaharlal Dhawan
- Y. Narasimha Rao and Ors. v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi and Anr.
- State of Bihar v. Radha Krishna Singh & Ors.
- Satya v. Teja Singh
- Sankaran Govindan v. Lakshmi Bharathi & Others
- R. Viswanathan v. Rukn-Ul-M.Ulk Syed Abdul Wajid