Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.38 seconds)
Documents citing Smt. Gopi And Anr. vs Madanlal on 30 April, 1969

Bholooram (Bhola) And Ors. vs Ramlal And Ors. on 1 February, 1989

17. The Court below committed illegality in misplacing the burden on the defendants to disprove the factum of adoption and invalidity in it. He was not justified in drawing inference against them for not examining Jatibai as their witnesses. It is well settled that the primary burden to prove the adoption and its validity rests on the person who seeks to displace the natural succession by alleging his adoption. See Smt. Gopi v. Madanlal, AIR 1970 Raj 190.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Sri Jatindra Nath Gangopadhyay, ... vs Sri Rabikant Simlai, Midnapore on 27 September, 2012

7. It has been submitted by the Learned Counsel for the appellant that after remand of the case by the Honble National Commission the complainant/respondent did not adduce any expert evidence, but the appellant adduced the evidence of the expert Dr. Kedar Banerjee who has opined that there was no negligence on the part of the appellant. It is contended that the appellant is an Orthopaedic Surgeon and the contention of the complainant/respondent in this regard was not dealt with by the Learned District Forum and, as such, the respondent cannot urge this point in absence of any cross appeal. It is submitted that the appellant is an Orthopaedic Surgeon and it is evident from the fact that he is a member of the Orthopaedic Association. It is submitted that the Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. The Learned Counsel for the appellant has referred to the decisions reported in (2005) 7 SCC 1 [State of Punjab Vs. Shiv Ram & Ors.]; (2009) 3 SCC 1 [Martin F. Dsouza Vs. Mohd. Isfaq]; (2010) 3 SCC 480 [Kusum Sharma & Ors. Vs. Batra Hospital & Medical Research Centre & Ors.]; IV (2006) CPJ 332 (NC) [Krishna Murari Sinha Vs. Dr. Md. Basher Alam]; (2005) 6 SCC 1 [Jacob Mathew Vs. State of Pubjab & Anr.]; AIR-1970 Rajasthan-190 [Smt. Gopi & Anr. Vs. Madanlal]; AIR 1982, Supreme Court-1157 [Gambhir Vs. State of Maharashtra]; 1987-Allahabad Law Journal-483 [Smt. Rameswari Gupta Vs. Ram Nayaran Gupta]; AIR-2002-Andhra Pradesh 234 [Balaji Traders, Chirala Vs. Ponnuri Lakshmaiah]; 1(2003)-Consumer Protection Judgement-365 (Maharashtra) [Babanrao Yadav Vs. Lion Tarachand Bappa Hospital]; I (2003)-Consumer Protection Judgements 153 (N.C.)
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1