"This court in Olagundoye & Ors v Albert & Ors (2014) LPELR – 22980 (CA) on whether a certified true copy of a public document is presumed genuine until the contrary is proved held thus;

"The said Exhibit A of the Applicants was certified by one O. Akiluwade, Registrar High Court of Justice, Okitipupa Ondo State in substantial conformity with the provisions of Sections 111 - 112 Evidence Act Cap 112 LFN 1990 now Sections 104 - 105 of the Evidence Act 2011. The Sections read as follows. "104. (1) Every public officer having the custody of a public document which any person has a right to inspect shall give that person on demand a copy of it on payment of the legal fees prescribed in that respect, together with a certificate written at the foot of such copy that it is a true copy of such document or part of it as the case may be. (2) The certificate mentioned in Subsection (1) of this Section shall be dated and subscribed by such officer with his name and his official title, and shall be sealed, whenever such officer is authorized by law to make use of a seal, and such copies so certified shall be called certified copies. (3) An officer who, by the ordinary course of official duty, is authorized to deliver such copies, shall be deemed to have the custody of such documents within the meaning of this Section. 105. Copies of documents certified in accordance with Section 104 may be produced in proof of the contents of the public documents or parts of the public document of which they purport to be copies. The provisions of Sections 111 - 112 of the Evidence Act Cap. 112 LFN 1990 (now Sections 104 - 105 Evidence Act 2011) are so clearly appropriate to the instant case that one does not need to go as far as to say that in any event the totality of the averments in the Respondents Counter-Affidavit are not sufficient to disprove the presumption of genuineness of certified true copies, presumption of regularity and the presumption of proper custody assumed in favour of the Exhibit A attached to the Applicants' motion on Notice and the Exhibit B attached to the Applicants' further affidavit in support which are respectively certified true copies and the true copy of the Appellants'/Applicants' Notice of Appeal of 19th July, 2010. Section 114, 116 and 117 of the Evidence Act Cap 112 LFN 1990 (now Sections 146 and 168 of the Evidence Act 2011) incorporate in different versions the common law concepts of presumption of genuineness of certified true copies of public documents. Presumption of regularity of official document and presumption of proper custody." per OWOADE, J.C.A ( PP. 21-23, PARAS. D-A)"

PER A.O.OBASEKI-ADEJUMO, J.C.A in the case of ZENITH BANK PLC . V. CHIEF SUNDAY EDEH & ANORS. LER (2019) CA/315/2018  

http://legalpediaonline.com/zenith-bank-plc-v-chief-sunday-edeh.anor