Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (0.33 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Prem Singh & Ors vs Birbal & Ors on 2 May, 2006
In Rattan Singh v. Nirmal Gill, (2021) 15 SCC 300, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that when the disputed documents
are registered, while examining as to upon whom the onus of proof
would lie, the courts would be guided by the settled legal principle
that a document is presumed to be genuine if the same is registered, as
held by this Court in Prem Singh v. Birbal (supra). The Hon'ble
Supreme court held that in view of aforesaid proposition, the initial
onus was on the plaintiff, who had challenged the registered
document.
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
The Limitation Act, 1963
Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, 1908
Section 107 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Prahlad Pradhan vs Sonu Kumhar on 16 October, 2019
In Prahlad Pradhan v. Sonu Kumhar, (2019) 10 SCC 259, a
case arising out of partition suit, the contention raised by the
appellants that since as per the Survey Settlement of 1964 the suit
property was exclusively recorded in the name of a tenant, the suit
property was his self-acquired property, was rejected by observing
that the entries in the revenue records do not confer title to a property,
nor do they have any presumptive value on the title. They only enable
the person in whose favour mutation is recorded, to pay the land
revenue in respect of the land in question. As a consequence, it was
held that merely because name was recorded in the Survey Settlement
of 1964 as a recorded tenant in the suit property, it would not make
him the sole and exclusive owner of the suit property.
Siddu Venkappa Devadiga vs Smt. Rangu S. Devadiga And Ors. on 6 January, 1977
55. For the same point, he has earlier relied upon the judgment
reported in (1977) 3 SCC 532 (Siddu Venkappa Devadiga Vs. Smt.
Rangu S. Devadiga and Ors.) paragraph 8 to submit that a case
cannot be based on grounds outside the plea of the parties, which is
the basic principle of law.