Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.20 seconds)Section 3 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 41 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Subhra Mukherjee & Anr. C vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. & Ors on 8 March, 2000
14. The pleadings of the parties and evidence on record reveals that the
appellant/plaintiff categorically failed to prove the ownership of the suit land in
view of the contention in the pleadings. The appellant failed to prove the
ownership or the possession thereof. The ratio of judgment reported as 1982 (1)
RCR 637 is squarely applicable in the facts of this case. Further, as held in
Subhra Mukharjee Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., AIR 2000 SC 1203, the party
which makes the allegation must prove it. The appellant has failed to produce
RCA No. 05/14 page 15 of 17
Mohan Singh @ Mohan Lal V/s Chandro Devi & Ors
Sh. G. N. Pandey Additional District Judge (NE) Karkardooma Courts Delhi.
any oral or documentary evidence to prove the contentions. Undisputedly, the
burden lies on the appellant to establish such facts.
Section 80 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Shri Raj Kumar Singh & Anr. vs Mrs. Jagjit Chawla & Others on 6 September, 2011
10. It is well settled that a suit has to be tried on the basis of the pleadings of
the contesting parties which is filed in the suit before the trial court in the form
of plaint and written statement and the nucleus of the case of the plaintiff and
the contesting case of the defendant in the form of issues emerges out of that.
Being a civil suit for partition, this suit is to be decided on the basis of
preponderance of probabilities. As held in Raj Kumar Singh & Anr. Vs. Jagjit
Chawla, reported in 183 (2011) DLT 418, "A civil case is decided on balance of
probabilities.