Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 428 (1.01 seconds)
Documents citing Martand Pandharinath Chaudhari vs Radhabai Krishnarao Deshmukh on 24 March, 1930

Kamlesh Kushwaha vs Vibha Kuma R on 9 May, 2022

23. The principle laid down in the aforesaid case laws is fully applicable in the present case and in absence of non-entrance of principal plaintiff in the witness box to prove her case as per plaint and the documents executed much prior to the year 2011; in which, in absence of evidence of principal, the opportunity to cross examine her has not been given to the appellant / defendant and the appellant-defendant is raising objection right from the 26 SA No.1342/18 beginning that the power-of-attorney holder has no right to file civil suit and depose the evidence on behalf of the principal plaintiff in respect of the fact and knowledge which was not within the knowledge of the power-of-attorney holder.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 3 - A K Sharma - Full Document

Acting Through Its Authorised ... vs Delex Cargo India Pvt. Ltd on 21 January, 2023

43. Supreme Court in the case of Vidhyadhar vs Manikrao & Anr. (supra) inter alia held that where a party to the suit does not appear in the witness box and states his own case on oath and CS (Comm.) No. 48/2019 M/s. Aviaxpert Pvt. Ltd. vs. Delex Cargo India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Page 37 of 55 does not offer himself to be cross examined by the other side, a presumption would arise that the case set up by him is not correct as has been held in a series of decisions passed by various High Courts and the Privy Council beginning from the decision in Sardar Gurbakhsh Singh vs Gurdial Singh, AIR 1927 PC 230; followed by Kirpa Singh vs Ajaipal Singh, AIR 1930 Lahore 1; Martand Pandharinath Chaudhari vs Radhabai Krishnarao Deshmukh, AIR 1931 Bom 97; Gulla Kharagjit Carpenter vs Narsingh Nandkishore Rawat, AIR 1970 MP 225; Arjun Singh vs. Virendra Nath, AIR 1971 Allahabad 29 and Bhagwan Dass vs. Bhishan Chand, AIR 1974 P&H 7. A presumption under Section 114 of the Evidence Act, 1872 accordingly can be drawn against a party who did not enter the witness box.
Delhi District Court Cites 56 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bhimu (Deceased) Through Lrs vs Gaura Devi (Deceased) Through Lrs on 9 August, 2024

Where a party to the suit does not appear into the witness box and states his own case on oath and does not offer himself to be cross examined by the other side, a presumption would arise that the case set up by him is not correct as has been held in a series of decisions passed by various High Courts and the Privy Council beginning from the decision in Sardar Gurbakhsh Singh v. Gurdial Singh and Anr. This was followed by the Lahore High Court in Kirpa Singh v. Ajaipal Singh and Ors. AIR (1930) Lahore 1 and the Bombay High Court in Martand Pandharinath Chaudhari v. Radhabai Krishnarao Deshmukh AIR (1931) Bom.97.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 46 - Cited by 0 - V Singh - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next