Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 51 (0.54 seconds)
Sware Health Care Pvt. Ltd vs M/S Anondita Healthcare on 24 January, 2026 cites

L.I.C. Of India & Anr vs Ram Pal Singh Bisen on 16 March, 2010

67. This court finds valid force in the submission of learned Senior Counsel for the decree holders that the photocopy of the agreement dated 29.01.2015 could not have been taken into consideration by the Executing Court while adjudicating objections under Section 47 CPC, as the said document was never proved in accordance with law. It is undisputed that the agreement was not marked as an exhibit during the trial or even during execution proceedings and, therefore, did not form part of the evidentiary record on the basis of which the decree was passed. An executing (Uploaded on 24/01/2026 at 11:19:47 AM) (Downloaded on 24/01/2026 at 08:34:13 PM) [2026:RJ-JP:2385] (35 of 44) [CR-12/2023] court cannot rely upon documents which were neither proved nor judicially accepted. Further, although an application seeking permission to lead secondary evidence under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was filed, the same was neither allowed nor adjudicated upon by the Executing Court. In the absence of a judicial determination permitting secondary evidence, the photocopy of the agreement continued to remain legally inadmissible and devoid of evidentiary value. Mere filing of an application under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 does not, by itself, confer admissibility upon a document unless the foundational facts are established and permission is expressly granted by the court. This view is guided by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Life Insurance Corporation of India & Another vs. Ram Pal Singh Bisen (supra).
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 302 - D Verma - Full Document

Meenakshi Saxena vs Ecgc Ltd(Formerly Known As Export ... on 18 May, 2018

In the case of Sanwarlal Agrawal & Others (supra), while referring the earlier judgment of Meenakshi Saxena v. ECGC Ltd., (2018) 7 SCC 479, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that when there is ambiguity in the decree with regard to material aspects, then it becomes the bounden duty of the executing court to interpret the decree in the process of giving a true effect to the (Uploaded on 24/01/2026 at 11:19:47 AM) (Downloaded on 24/01/2026 at 08:34:13 PM) [2026:RJ-JP:2385] (38 of 44) [CR-12/2023] decree. The objection raised by the judgment debtors, therefore, deserves to be sustained.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 20 - N V Ramana - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next