Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.46 seconds)Section 103 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 96 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Legal Representatives Of Decd.Patel ... vs Legal Representatives Of Decd.Patel ... on 9 July, 2014
22. The learned counsel for the appellant relied on the decision of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Somakka (Dead) by Legal
Page 13 of 31
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.A.No.1041 of 2010
Representatives vs. K.P. Basavaraj (Dead) by Legal Representatives
reported in (2022) 8 SCC 261, for the proposition that the first appeal is
a valuable right available to the party and the Lower Appellate Court
while deciding the appeal has to follow the procedure contemplated under
Order XLI and Rule 31 and to independently analyze the documents and
evidences and arrive at a finding of fact. The learned counsel for the
appellant further contended that the judgment of the lower appellate court
is not based on the material available on record following the procedure
as contemplated under law and therefore it is perverse and sought for
allowing of this second appeal.
Narayan Sitaram Badwaik (Dead) Thr. ... vs Bisaram And Ors. on 17 February, 2021
27. The learned counsel for the respondents also relied on the
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narayan Sitaramji Badwaik
vs. Bisaram and Others reported in (2021) 15 SCC 234 for the
proposition that as per Section 103 of CPC, it clearly provides for the
High Court to decide an issue of fact, provided there is sufficient evidence
on record before it on the circumstances stated therein.
Kurian Chacko vs Varkey Ouseph on 25 September, 1968
31. The learned Judge V.R. Krishna Iyer, J., (as
he then was a Judge of the Kerala High Court) in
1969, while deciding the case between Kurian
Chacko v. Varkey Ouseph [Kurian Chacko v. Varkey
Ouseph, 1968 SCC OnLine Ker 101 : AIR 1969 Ker
316] , dealing with a similar judgment of the first
appellate court which had been disposed of by a brief
order, observed as follows :
Manjula vs Shyamsundar on 27 January, 2021
Very recently, this Court in 2022 (to which
one of us, Brother Abdul Nazeer, J. was a member)
in Manjula v. Shyamsundar [Manjula v. Shyamsundar,
(2022) 3 SCC 90 : (2022) 2 SCC (Civ) 33] , reiterated
the same view in para 8 thereof, which is reproduced
hereunder :
Section 58 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 9 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Sneha Vinod Kumar Balmiki (Kajaniya) vs Vinod Kumar Mahendra Balmiki ... on 6 April, 2018
In 2015, this Court again in Vinod
Kumar v. Gangadhar [Vinod Kumar v. Gangadhar,
(2015) 1 SCC 391 : (2015) 1 SCC (Civ) 521]
considering the previous judgment recorded its view in
paras 18 and 19 which are reproduced hereunder :
1