Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 21 (0.03 seconds)Section 41 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 52 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Bishunath Tewari And Ors. vs Mst. Mirchi on 6 May, 1952
"Under Section 44 a party can, in a collateral proceedings in
which fraud may be set up as a defence, show that a decree or
order obtained by the opposite party against him was passed by a
Court without jurisdiction or was obtained by fraud or collusion
and is not necessary to bring an independent suit for setting it
aside, Bansi vs. Dhapo; Rajib vs. Lakham; Parbati vs. Gajraj;
Prayag vs. Siva; Hare Krishna vs. Umesh; Ashwini vs. Banamali;
Manchharam vs. Kalidas; Ranganath vs Govind; Kamiruddin vs.
Jhadejanessa; Bhagwandas vs Patel & Co; Bishunath vs. Mirchi
and Vijaya vs. Padmanabham"."
Section 106 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Smt. Chand Dhawan vs Jawaharlal Dhawan on 11 June, 1993
8.5. Ld. Counsel for the Defendants has placed reliance upon a
judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Chand Dhawan (Smt) vs.
Jawaharlal Dhawan, (1993) 3 SCC 406, wherein it has been observed that:-
State Of Bihar vs Radha Krishna Singh & Ors on 20 April, 1983
8.6. Similarly, in matter of State of Bihar vs. Radha Krishna Singh,
(1983) 96 LW (JS) 93, it has been observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court that a
CS/542/2018 Page 9 of 21
judgment in rem, e.g. judgments or orders passed in admiralty, probate
proceedings etc., would always be admissible.
S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu (Dead) By ... vs Jagannath (Dead) By L.Rs. And Others on 27 October, 1993
In S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu (Dead) by LRs vs. Jagannath
(Dead) by LRs & ors, 1994 SCC (1) 1, it has been observed that:-
Kishan Lal Barwa vs Sharda Saharan & Another on 18 February, 2015
In Kishan Lal Barwa vs. Sharda Saharan & anr , 2015 SCC Onine
All. 4980, it has been observed that:-