Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 89 (2.60 seconds)
Documents citing N.S.M. Adaikappa Chettiar vs The Official Assignee, High Court on 3 January, 1969

L. Ramesh vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 4 August, 2021

Learned senior counsel for the petitioners in support of his contentions, placed reliance on the judgment of Privy Council in "A.L.N.Narayanan Chettyar v. Official Assignee of the High Court, Rangoon" (referred supra), wherein it is held that fraud of this nature, like any other charge of a criminal offence whether made in civil or criminal proceedings, must be established beyond reasonable doubt.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 36 - Cited by 1 - M S Murthy - Full Document

Roop Narain And Others vs D.D.C.And Others on 22 July, 2020

"7. The High Court has carefully considered the various circumstances relied upon by the appellant and has held that they are not at all conclusive to prove the case of fraud. It is well settled that fraud like any other charge of a criminal offence whether made in civil or criminal proceedings, must be established beyond reasonable doubt: per Lord Atkin in A.L.N. Narayanan Chettyar v. Official Assignee, High Court, Rangoon [AIR 1941 PC 93 : 196 IC 404] . However suspicious may be the circumstances, however strange the coincidences, and however grave the doubt, suspicion alone can never tale the place of proof. In our normal life we are sometimes faced with unexplained phenomenon and strange coincidences, for, as it is said truth is stranger than fiction. In these circumstances, therefore, after going through the judgment of the High Court we are satisfied that the appellant has not been able to make out a case of fraud as found by the High Court. As such the High Court was fully justified in negativing the plea of fraud and in decreeing the suit of the plaintiff."
Allahabad High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Crsc Research And Design Institute ... vs Dedicated Freight Corridor ... on 30 September, 2020

In U.O.I. v. Chaturbhai M. Patel & Co34, the Supreme Court held, relying on the judgement of Lord Atkin in A.L.N. Narayanan Chettyar v. Official Assignee, High Court, Rangoon35, that "fraud like any other charge of a criminal offence whether made in civil or criminal proceedings, must be established beyond reasonable doubt." The aspect was clarified by holding, further, that "however suspicious may be the circumstances, however strange the coincidences, and however grave the doubt, suspicion alone can never take the place of proof."
Delhi High Court Cites 45 - Cited by 15 - C H Shankar - Full Document

Mangipudi Nagaraju vs State Of Andhra Pradaesh on 8 October, 2021

In ―A.L.N.Narayanan Chettyar v. Official Assignee of the High Court, Rangoon5‖ it is held that ―fraud of this nature, like any other charge of a criminal offence whether made in civil or criminal proceedings, must be established beyond reasonable doubt.‖ The Division Bench of the Apex Court in "Placido Francisco Pinto (D) by LRs and another vs. Jose Francisco Pinto and another6 reiterated the above principle.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - M S Murthy - Full Document

Sh. Arjun Singh vs Smt. Rachna on 21 January, 2022

712), the Supreme Court has stated as follows: "It is well settled that fraud like any other charge of a criminal offence whether made in civil or criminal proceedings, must be established beyond reasonable doubt; per Lord Atkin in A. L. N. Narayanan Chettiyar v. Official Assignee, High Court Rangoon, AIR 1941 PC 93. However suspicious may be the circumstances, however strange the coincidences, and however grave the doubts, suspicion alone can never take the place of proof. In our normal life we are sometimes faced with unexplainable phenomenon and strange coincidences, for, as it is said, truth is stranger than fiction.
Delhi District Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mrs Leena Rego vs Smt Laura on 12 November, 2021

"7. The High Court has carefully considered the various circumstances relied upon by the appellant and has held that they are not at all conclusive to prove the case of fraud. It is well settled that fraud like any other 57 charge of a criminal offence whether made in civil or criminal proceedings, must be established beyond reasonable doubt; per Lord Atkin in A. L. N. Narayanan Chettyar v. Official Assignee, High Court Rangoon. However suspicious may be the circumstances, however strange the coincidences, and however grave the doubts, suspicion alone can never take the place of proof. In our normal life we are sometimes faced with unexplainable phenomenon and strange coincidences, for, as it is said, truth is stronger than fiction. In these circumstances, therefore, after going through the judgment of the High Court we are satisfied that the appellant has not been able to make out a case of fraud as found by the High Court. As such the High Court was fully justified in negativing the plea of fraud and in decreeing the suit of the plaintiff."
Karnataka High Court Cites 99 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next