1. In a salt for recovery of money filed by respondent No. 2 against the petitioner and respondents Nos. 1 and 3 to 14. The statement of General Manager of the respondent-Bank was recorded by the learned Single Judge on 28th May 1966. In examination-in-chief the witness averred that P. W. 5/2 was a certified Resolution No. ''62 dated the 27th November 1957 of the Central Board of Director, of the National Bank of Pakistan certified by Mr. Fateh Ahmad Khan, the then Secretary to the Board.
2. An objection was raised by the petitioner's counsel that the certified copy could not be proved without the production of the original minute book and the Secretary himself could prove the copy.
3. This objection was overruled on the ground that the certified copy was of a Banker's Book and could be proved according to the provisions of the Banker's Book Evidence Act. Objection was also taken to Exh. P. W. 5/3 which is a copy of the official Gazette and the same was also overruled. This Revision Petition was directed against the order by which the objection of the petitioner to the admissibility of Exh. P. W. 5/2 and 3 in evidence was overruled, but the Revision petition was admitted only to consider whether the objection of the petitioner and the manner to prove Exh. P.
4. W. 5/2 was correct or not.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised the following contentions:--
(1) That a minute book was not a Banker's Book as defined in section 2(3) of the Banker's Books Evidence Act of 1891.
(2) Under section 4 the copy is admissible only to the extent that original entry Is by law admissible.
6. If the original could not be admissible without formal proof the copy also could not be admitted simply by being tendered. Reliance has been placed for this proposition on Messrs Muhammad Siddiq Muhammad Umar and another v. The Australasia Bank Ltd. PLD1966SC684.
(3) The Banker's Books Evidence Act is not applicable if the Bank itself is a party to the case.
(4) A copy could not be deemed to be a certified copy as it does not show that the entry is contained in the ordinary book of the Bank as required by section 2(8) of the Banker's Books Evidence Act, 1891.
7. The crucial point in the case is whether a minute book of the Bank is covered by the definition of Banker's Books in section 2(3) of the above Act. The word 'Banker's Books' has been defined as "including ledgers, day books, cash books, account books, and all other books used in the ordinary business of a Bank". It was not disputed and correctly so, that a minute book is a book used in the ordinary business of a Bank and contains the resolutions passed at the meeting of the Board of Directors who have to take numerous decisions in relations to the policy matters regarding actual business of the Bank. The contention of the learned counsel, however, was that words "all other books used in the ordinary business of a Bank" should be deemed as a ejusdem generis to the type of books that have been dealt with earlier in the definition i.e. Ledgers, day books, cash books and account books all of which are of a type of account books and the Banker's Books, therefore, should be deemed only those books which pertain to accounts. But the principle of ejusdem generis will not apply to a case where there are adequate grounds to show that the general word has not been used in the limited order of ideas to which its predecessor belongs. Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, 11th Edition, page 331. It is true that certain types of books are specified in the definition, but the definition is not exhaustive of those books and only includes them and the details of certain accounts books as being included in the meaning of the terms 'Banker's Books' cannot under any principle of interpreta--tion, confine the scope of the definition to the books holding the character of accounts books. This is further clarified by the arse of words which are wide enough to bring within its scope any book provided it is used in the ordinary business of a bank. There is no doubt that a minute book of the Board of Directors is a book eked in the ordinary business of a Bank. The general superintendence and direction of the affairs and business of the National Bank of Pakistan is entrusted to the Central Board which may exercise all such power and do acts and things as may be exercised or done by the Bank and are not by the National Bank of Pakistan Ordinance, 1949, expressly directed or required to be done by the Bank in general meeting, vide section 12 of the above Ordinance. Section 14 of the Ordinance provides the constitution of the Central Board in which there are a number of Directors. Both these sections are in Chapter IV of the Ordinance which is headed as "Management". These provisions make it amply clear that the affairs and business of the Bank is to be under the direction of a Central Board which consists of a number of Directors and it cannot be expected that the Directors will carry on this business without reaching a decision in the meetings of the Central Board and without passing resolutions therein and these resolutions are normally expected to be incorporated in a minute book. The minute book of the Central Board is therefore, a book used In the ordinary business of a Bank and is covered by the definition of Banker's Books. The provisions of the English Act are also to the same effect and in Asylum for Idiots v. Handysides ((1906) 22 T L R 573 (C A)) it was held that the term 'Ranker's Books' applies to books in the custody or control of the successors to the Bank by whom the entries were made; and a book is used in the ordinary business of the Bank, if kept for reference, although "it may not be in daily use".
8. The second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is also without force as section 4 of the Banker's Books Evidence Act provides that a certified copy of any entry in a Banker's Books shall in all legal proceedings, be received as prima facie evidence of the existence of such entry, and shall be admitted as evidence of the matters, transactions, and accounts therein recorder in every case, to the same extent as the original entry itself is by law admissible. The certified copy, therefore, is to be admitted as evidence of its own force and need not be proved formally except by tender of the document. The Supreme Court authority Messrs Muhammad Siddiq Muhammad Umar and another v. The Australasia Bank Limited (PLD 1966 SC 684) does not support the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner as will be apparent from the following passage:- "It will be observed that all that this section says is that the certified copy shall be prima facie evidence of the existence of such an entry in the books of the bank and shall be admitted as evidence of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded to the same extent as the original entry itself is now by low admissible, but no further or otherwise. It does not purport, therefore, to give the certified copy any greater, efficacy than the original itself. It merely provides a simplified mode of proof of the original entry, provided the original entry itself is relevant to the enquiry or was admissible under the law prevailing in 101. The Evidence Act, which was enacted in 1872, was law applicable on the date of the enact--ment of the Banker's Books Evidence Act, and it clearly governed the proof of the original entry. If under that Act the original entry was not by itself sufficient to charge a person with liability the certification of that entry under the latter Act could not make it so. We must not also confuse between admissibility in evidence and sufficiency to charge with liability. It is with the latter that we are concerned here and this is not dealt with by the Banker's Books Evidence Act."
9. This passage, undoubtedly, shows that the copy, as such, is, evidence but the question of sufficiency is a different matter.
10. The third contention that the Banker's Books Evidence Act is not applicable if the Bank itself is a party to the case is also without substance as there is nothing in the Act to exclude the applicability of section 4 to a case where the Bank itself is a party to the suit. There is nothing In the Act from which this pro--position may find any support either from any specific provision or even from any implication. On the other hand, the above authority of the Supreme Court shows that the document in that case also was proved under section 4 of the Banker's Books Evidence Act by the Australasia Bank from its own books, although the Bank was a party to the suit. This point has also not been taken in the grounds of Revision, but as it was raised at the time of hearing have dealt with it.
11. The last submission that the certificate was not valid as it did not show that it was from an ordinary book of the Bank is also devoid of any weight. Certified copy is defined in section 2 of subsection
(8) as follows:- "Section 2 (8).-'Certified copy' means a copy of any entry in the books of a bank together with a certificate written at the foot of such copy that it is a true copy of such entry, that such entry is contained in one of the ordinary books of the bank and was made in the usual and ordinary course of business, and that such book !s still in the custody of the bank, such certificate being dated and subscribed by the principal accountant or manager of the bank with his name and official title."
12. The certificate in Exh. P. W. 5/2 is also reproduced below for the proper appreciation of the point raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner:- "Certified that the above is a true copy of the entry in the agenda of the 60th meeting of the Central Board of Directors of the National Bank of Pakistan held on 29th November 1957, that it was laid in usual and ordinary course of business and that the above agenda is still in the custody of the Bank."
13. It was submitted that although the certificate shows that it was a true copy of the agenda and it was made in usual and ordinary course of business and that the above agenda is still in the custody of the Bank, but there is nothing to show in the certificate that the entry contained therein is in one of the ordinary books of the Bank. In my opinion, the want of these words that "such entry is contained in one of the ordinary books of the Bank" does not invalidate the certificate as such. It is apparent from the certi--ficate that it is a true copy of the agenda of the 60th meeting of the Central Board of Directors and as discussed in relations to the interpretation of the word "Banker's Books" the minutes book of the Bank is used in the ordinary business of a Bank and as such it must be considered to be an ordinary book. From the certificate in Exh. P. W. 5/2 itself it could be found out that it is a true copy of the agenda and the question whether a minute book is an ordinary book becomes a question of law in the circumstances of the case.
14. There is no merit in the Revision petition which is dismissed with costs.