6 Ran ( P C ) 142 စီရင်ထုံးပါအဆုံးအဖြတ်ကိစ္စ။[Part Twelve]

 ဆရာကြီးဦးမြသင်ကြားပို့ချချက်များ

6 Ran ( P C ) 142 

BHOGILAL BHIKACHAND AND OTHERS (Plaintiffs)

                      V.

ROYAL INSURANCE CO., LTD. (Defendants).

PRESENT: VISCOUNT HALDANE,LORD ATKINSON,LORD BLANESBURGH,LORD DARLING and LORD WARRINGTON OF CLYFFE.

စီရင်ထုံးပါအဆုံးအဖြတ်ကိစ္စ။[ Part Twelve ]

————————————————————————

6 Ran ( P C ) 142 

BHOGILAL BHIKACHAND AND OTHERS (Plaintiffs)

                      V.

ROYAL INSURANCE CO., LTD. (Defendants).

PRESENT: VISCOUNT HALDANE,LORD ATKINSON,LORD BLANESBURGH,LORD DARLING and LORD WARRINGTON OF CLYFFE.

(On Appeal from the High Court at Rangoon.)

Appeal No. 103 of 1926 from a decree of the High Court in its Appellate Jurisdiction (June 15.1925) reversing a decree of the Court in its Original Jurisdiction (June 24.1924).

At the conclusion of the arguments their Lordships intimated that the appeal would be allowed, and that the reasons would be delivered later.

December 16. The judgment of their Lordships was delivered by LORD BLANESBURGH.

J.C.* 1927 ,Dec. 16.

သက်သေခံအက်ဥပဒေပုဒ်မ၁၅၇ပါပြဌာန်းချက်များနှင့်စပ်လျဉ်းသော၊စီရင်ထုံးစာမျက်နှာ၁၆၇ရှိအောက်ပါပညာပေးမြွက်ဆိုချက်တို့ကိုလည်းမှတ်သားရာ၏-

[The second matter on which their Lordships feel it desirable to observe is the tendering and reception in evidence of the letter written by Bhattachariee to his official chief on the 30th June, 1923.

This letter was tendered and received under section 157 of the Evidence Act.

Their Lordships desire emphatically to say that the letter was not, under that section, properly receivable for any purpose. 

It was of no greater value as evidence, although it was calculated to do much more injury to impartiality, than an anonymous letter.

It is idle to suggest that the letter was tendered to fix a date, and to its malign influence may well be largely attributable the statement of the learned Trial Judge in his judgment, " For some reason that I am unable to explain I feel that there is more in the case than meets the eye"; as well as the strong view against the appellants taken by the learned Appellate Judges. 

Its contents ought to have been excluded from judicial consideration in all Courts as completely as they have been ignored by their Lordships.]

[ desire emphatically = ပြတ်ပြတ်သားသား ]

[ it was calculated = ရည်စူး ]

[ It is idle = အခြေအမြစ်မရှိ ]

[ malign = ဆိုးဝါးသော ]

[ I feel that there is more in the case than meets the eye = တိမ်မယောင်နှင့်နက်သော၊လွယ်မယောင်နှင့်ခက်သောအမှု ]

[ Its contents ought to have been excluded from judicial consideration = တရားစီရင်ရာ၌စဉ်းစားဆင်ခြင်ခြင်းမှဖယ်ထုတ်ပစ်သင့်သည် ]

ပရီဗီကောင်စီကစီရင်ထုံးစာမျက်နှာ၁၅၄၊ပထမအပိုဒ်တွင်အောက်ပါအတိုင်းဖော်ပြသည်-

[The contest at the trial centred on the allegations in the respondents' written statement, and the issue of this appeal has depended upon the question whether either of their allegations in that statement is true. 

The first of them--that the parcel never contained diamonds of the stated value--put the appellants to proof of the fact that it did; the"burden of the alternative allegation of fraudulent conspiracy remained heavily with the respondents.]

အထက်ဖော်ပြပါစာပိုဒ်တွင်၊တရားပြိုင်ဘက်မှအဓိကအငြင်းပွါးသည့်အောက်ပါအချက်နှစ်ရပ်ကိုမီးမောင်းထိုးပြသည်-

(က)အချင်းဖြစ်ပါဆယ်ထုပ်အတွင်း၌ဖော်ပြထားသောတန်ဖိုးရှိသည့်စိန်များမပါသည့်ကိစ္စ။

(ခ)လိမ်လည်လှည့်ဖြားကာရာဇဝတ်မကင်းသောပူးပေါင်းကြံစည်ခြင်းကိစ္စ။

ထိုကိစ္စကို[ alternative allegation ]ဟုရည်ညွှန်းဖော်ပြထားရာ၊ပထမကိစ္စမဟုတ်လျှင်၊ဒုတိယကိစ္စဖြစ်ကြောင်း၊နှစ်ခွစွပ်စွဲချေပခြင်းဖြစ်သည်။

တရားပြိုင်ဘက်သည်၊ရှေ့နောက်မညီညွတ်သောတင်ပြချက်များ[ inconsistent pleas ]တင်ပြခွင့်ရှိသည်ကိုသတိပြုပါ။

—————————————————-