Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.24 seconds)The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Section 4 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
The Registration Act, 1908
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 3 in The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [Entire Act]
Section 18 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Mahesh Dattatray Thirthkar vs State Of Maharashtra on 4 March, 2009
60. The Supreme Court, time and again, has held that Section 51A of the
L.A. Act was introduced for the specific purpose of obviating the
necessity of proving certified copies of deeds by their executants. As
held in Ram Singh (supra), Lal Chand (supra) and Mahesh Dattatray
Thirthkar (supra), Section 51A relieves the party seeking to adduce
certified copies of sale deeds as evidence from bringing the parties of
the deeds to formally prove the same.
Wadi vs Amilal And Ors. on 12 July, 2002
In any event, as held in Wadi (supra) by the
Supreme Court, invocation of Clause (b) of Order XLI Rule 27 of the
Code is not dependent upon the vigilance/negligence of the parties.
Thus, the said Clause overrides the rigours of Clause (aa) of Order XLI
Rule 27 in any event.
Bijender Singh And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 27 November, 2017
35. It is well-settled that even if a document is marked as an exhibit
without objection, such fact does not automatically prove its content.
Thus, the authenticity of the consideration mentioned therein did not
stand automatically proved but had to be independently established by
the claimant. There is no doubt that a sale deed executed by the
clamant is one type of evidence as held in Bijender (supra) by the
Supreme Court. However, that does not mean that such a deed
executed by the father of a claimant would be accepted as sacrosanct
as a correct indicator of the market value without looking into the
attending circumstances and/or other evidence, if produced.