Section 42 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Relevancy and Effect of Judgments, Orders or Decrees

Section 42 explains when a judgment, order or decree other than one covered by Section 41 becomes relevant in evidence. The provision applies where the earlier decision relates to a matter of a public nature that is relevant to the enquiry, but the earlier decision is not conclusive proof of what it states.

Legal position covered by this article: This page explains the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 as it stood immediately before the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024. It is intended for matters in which the pre-commencement Evidence Act framework is relevant.

Text and meaning of Section 42

Section 42 - Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in section 41.

Judgments, orders or decrees other than those mentioned in section 41 are relevant if they relate to matters of a public nature relevant to the enquiry; but such judgments, orders or decrees are not conclusive proof of that which they state.

What Section 42 means

The section creates a limited rule of relevancy. An earlier judgment, order or decree may be received as relevant evidence when it concerns a matter of public nature and that public matter is itself relevant to the question being examined by the court. However, the earlier decision does not finally establish the truth of the matter stated in it.

This distinction is important. Relevant means that the court may consider the earlier judgment as evidence having a bearing on the enquiry. Not conclusive proof means that the opposing party may still produce evidence to dispute the fact or public right referred to in that judgment.

Essential requirements of Section 42

There must be a judgment, order or decree other than one falling within Section 41.
It must relate to a matter of a public nature.
The matter of public nature must be relevant to the enquiry before the court.
The judgment, order or decree is relevant evidence, but it does not by itself conclusively prove the fact stated in it.

Illustration under Section 42

A sues B for trespass on A's land. B claims that a public right of way exists over the land, while A denies that claim. In an earlier suit brought by A against C concerning trespass on the same land, C had also claimed the same public right of way and a decree had been passed in C's favour.

The earlier decree is relevant because the alleged right of way is a matter of public nature relevant to the later enquiry. Nevertheless, that decree is not conclusive proof that the public right of way actually exists. The court in the later proceeding may consider other admissible evidence on the issue.

Relationship with Sections 40 to 44

Sections 40 to 44 form a connected group dealing with the relevance of previous judgments. Sections 40 and 41 address specified categories of previous judgments, including judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial and certain judgments in probate, matrimonial, admiralty or insolvency jurisdiction. Section 42 deals with judgments concerning relevant matters of public nature. Section 43 provides the general rule for other judgments, while Section 44 permits specified challenges relating to fraud, collusion or incompetency of the court.

Practical effect

Section 42 prevents an earlier decision about a public matter from being ignored merely because it does not fall under Section 41. At the same time, it prevents that earlier decision from automatically deciding the issue in the later proceeding. Its evidentiary value must therefore be considered along with the other admissible material before the court.

Key takeaway

Under Section 42 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a judgment, order or decree concerning a relevant matter of public nature is admissible as relevant evidence, but it is not conclusive proof of the facts stated in it.