The question is whether A has a right to a fishery Applying Section 13 Indian Evidence Act which of ...........

Indian Evidence Act (IEA) 1872 Relevancy of Facts

The question is, whether A has a right to a fishery. Applying Section 13, Indian Evidence Act which of the following facts can be relevant?

A deed conferring the fishery A’s ancestors, a mortgage of the fishery by A’s father

A subsequent grant of the fishery by A’s father, irreconcilable with the mortgage, particular instances in which A’s father exercised the right, or in which A’s father exercised the right, or in which the exercise of the right was stopped by A’s neighbours

Either (A) or (B)

None of them

Explanation:

Let’s break it down:

- Section 13 of the Indian Evidence Act lets you look at facts showing the existence of any right or custom—so not just how things stand today, but how things were treated or acknowledged in the past.

- *Option 1:* A deed that conferred the fishery right on A’s ancestors, and a mortgage of that right by A’s father. Both show history of exercising or acknowledging the right. These are relevant.

- *Option 2:* A later grant by A’s father (that doesn’t fit with the previous mortgage), plus instances where A’s father exercised the right, or was stopped from doing so by neighbors. These also show the way the right was treated and asserted in practice, or challenged—again, relevant.

- Both sets of facts fit what Section 13 is about: real-world actions and documents that connect to the right in question.

Option 3 (Either A or B)

Option 3 is correct.

Every piece of evidence in Options 1 or 2 can be relevant under Section 13. They all clue us in to how the fishery right was understood, claimed, or disputed across generations.