Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.29 seconds)Section 114 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 27 in The General Clauses Act, 1897 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. [Entire Act]
Gobinda Chandra Pal vs Dwarka Nath Pal And Ors. on 10 April, 1906
11. Mr. Mukherjee's criticism of that finding based on presumption under Section 114, Evidence Act is two-fold. First he says that presumption can be raised only when service has been by sending by Registered Post as Section 27 of the General Clauses Act provides. Even then, according to Mr. Mukherjee's contention, such presumption is rebutted when the defendant deposes in witness box and denies that the letter sent to him by post had been delivered to him, Reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Gobinda Chandra Saha v. Dwarka Nath. 19 Cal WN 489: (AIR 1915 Cal 313).
The West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956.
Sushil Kumar Chakravarty vs Ganesh Chandra Mitra on 26 November, 1957
16. If the letter containing notice sent by post has not been returned to the sender, then it is a case where presumption operates. Whether such presumption has been rebutted depends on the acceptability of evidence denying tender or delivery offered by the defendant. Mere denial will not lead invariably to rebuttal of presumption properly raised. That has been held in this Court by the Division Bench in the case of Sushil Kumar Chakravarty v. Ganesh Chandra Mitra .
Section 54 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
1