Explanation:

In the case of a thirty, year old document, produced from proper custody and not looking ex facie suspicious, presumption could be drawn that the signature and every other part of such document, which purport to be in the handwriting of any particular person is in that persons handwriting, and that it was duly executed and attested by the person by whom it was supposed to be executed and attested. Where the document relied is not more than 30 years old of the court based on no evidence could be interfered with. There can however be no presumption as to who the person who executed the instrument and what authority he had to execute the document and whether he had the requisite authority I or whether . the . contents of the documents are true. (Section 90).