October 2017

July 2017

June 2017

Evidence Act, 1872, S.64 & S.65–Secondary Evidence-Liberty to lead-Secondary evidence can be given only after proving the existence and loss of original documents.

By | June 14th, 2017|Evidence - Civil|

Comments Off on Evidence Act, 1872, S.64 & S.65–Secondary Evidence-Liberty to lead-Secondary evidence can be given only after proving the existence and loss of original documents.

Exhibiting of documents—An application for de-exhibiting documents tendered along with affidavit in examination-in-chief is not maintainable.

By | June 11th, 2017|Evidence - Civil|

Comments Off on Exhibiting of documents—An application for de-exhibiting documents tendered along with affidavit in examination-in-chief is not maintainable.

May 2017

Closing of Evidence—The court should normally pass the order of lesser gravity before passing the order of closing of evidence.

By | May 27th, 2017|Evidence - Civil|

Comments Off on Closing of Evidence—The court should normally pass the order of lesser gravity before passing the order of closing of evidence.

Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923-Employee Employer Relationship–A strict procedure that has to be followed by the civil courts, would not be applicable to the Commissioner especially since the matter has been discussed threadbare.

By | May 15th, 2017|Evidence - Civil|

Comments Off on Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923-Employee Employer Relationship–A strict procedure that has to be followed by the civil courts, would not be applicable to the Commissioner especially since the matter has been discussed threadbare.

Costs—Defaulting party has to pay cost on next day of hearing but the discretion is with the Court to extend the date for payment of costs.

By | May 14th, 2017|Evidence - Civil|

Comments Off on Costs—Defaulting party has to pay cost on next day of hearing but the discretion is with the Court to extend the date for payment of costs.

Evidence Act, 1872, S.65–Secondary Evidence-Once the plaintiff has duly proved the existence and loss of document sought to be proved by way of secondary evidence, he had fulfilled the requirement of Section 65

By | May 7th, 2017|Evidence - Civil|

Comments Off on Evidence Act, 1872, S.65–Secondary Evidence-Once the plaintiff has duly proved the existence and loss of document sought to be proved by way of secondary evidence, he had fulfilled the requirement of Section 65

Rebuttal Evidence—After earlier application for rebuttal evidence was dismissed, the petitioner moved another application for additional evidence–It is misuse of process of law.

By | May 7th, 2017|Evidence - Civil|

Comments Off on Rebuttal Evidence—After earlier application for rebuttal evidence was dismissed, the petitioner moved another application for additional evidence–It is misuse of process of law.

April 2017

Newspaper Reports—A news item without any further proof of what had actually happened through witnesses is of no value. Public Interest Litigation—Locus Standi—It cannot imply merely by writing a sentence that a person is residing in the State, is public-spirited and is, thus, filing a PIL.

By | April 17th, 2017|Evidence - Civil|

Comments Off on Newspaper Reports—A news item without any further proof of what had actually happened through witnesses is of no value. Public Interest Litigation—Locus Standi—It cannot imply merely by writing a sentence that a person is residing in the State, is public-spirited and is, thus, filing a PIL.

Civil Procedure Code, 1908-Cross Examination of witness-Once the interest of all the plaintiffs, under the changed circumstances, is no more common, learned trial Court ought to have afforded an opportunity to the petitioners for independently cross-examining the witnesses of the defendants so as to ensure that no prejudice is caused to the petitioners.

By | April 12th, 2017|Evidence - Civil|

Comments Off on Civil Procedure Code, 1908-Cross Examination of witness-Once the interest of all the plaintiffs, under the changed circumstances, is no more common, learned trial Court ought to have afforded an opportunity to the petitioners for independently cross-examining the witnesses of the defendants so as to ensure that no prejudice is caused to the petitioners.

March 2017