Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.20 seconds)Maria Margadia Sequeria Fernandes & Ors vs Erasmo Jack De Sequeria (D) Tr.Lrs.& Ors on 21 March, 2012
8. The Hon'ble supreme Court in Maria Margarida Sequeira
Fernandes v. Erasmo Jack de Sequeira3, called upon the
Courts not to be a mute witness and to take up a proactive role in
pursuing truth and administering justice. The Courts were called
upon to liberally use the power under Section 30 CPC for this
purpose. Though, large, the paragraphs 32 to 52 thereof are
extracted below highlighting the relevant for ready reference;
Mohanlal Shamji Soni vs Union Of India And Another on 22 February, 1991
In Mohanlal Shamji Soni v. Union of India
this Court observed that in such a situation a question
that arises for consideration is whether the Presiding
Officer of a court should simply sit as a mere umpire at a
contest between two parties and declare at the end of
the combat who has won and who has lost or is there
not any legal duty of his own, independent of the
parties, to take an active role in the proceedings in
finding the truth and administering justice? It is a well-
Ritesh Tewari & Anr vs State Of U.P.& Ors on 21 September, 2010
In Ritesh Tewari v. State of U.P.10 this Court
reproduced an oft-quoted quotation which reads as
under: (SCC p. 687, para 37)
"37. ... Every trial is voyage of discovery in which
truth is the quest."
Chandra Shashi vs Anil Kumar Verma on 14 November, 1994
In Chandra Shashi v. Anil Kumar Verma12 to
enable the courts to ward off unjustified interference in
their working, those who indulge in immoral acts like
perjury, prevarication and motivated falsehoods have to
be appropriately dealt with, without which it would not
be possible for any court to administer justice in the true
sense and to the satisfaction of those who approach it in
the hope that truth would ultimately prevail. People
would have faith in courts when they would find that
truth alone triumphs in the courts.
1