Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (0.43 seconds)
K.M.Kistamma,Died Per Lrs A2 To 6 And 2 ... vs Gandaiah, Malakpet, And 3 Others on 17 June, 2025 cites

Anathula Sudhakar vs P. Buchi Reddy (Dead) By Lrs & Ors on 25 March, 2008

No link document pertaining to the vendor of the plaintiff was filed by the plaintiff. The common judgment marked under Ex.A14 had no relevance to the facts of the case. The claim petition filed by Sri Khaja Moinuddin, the vendor of the defendants was allowed stating that the property could not be attached. The said order was not challenged by the plaintiff or her vendor and relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Anathula Sudhakar v. P.Buchi Reddy (dead) by LRs.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 2311 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

Vidhyadhar vs Manikrao & Anr. on 17 March, 1999

23. If the plaintiff is alive, competent and capable of deposing, she must enter into the witness box herself. Her husband can only depose as a witness if he had independent personal knowledge. If he was supporting her version, without being a party or attorney holder, his testimony has limited evidentiary value. As such, an adverse inference can be drawn against the plaintiff for not entering into the witness box as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in 12 (2005) 2 SCC 217 29 Dr.GRR, J ccca_169_1994 Vidhyadhar v. Manikrao & Another (cited supra). As such, this point is answered accordingly against the appellant - plaintiff.
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 681 - S S Ahmad - Full Document
1   2 3 Next