Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 50 (0.50 seconds)

Manivannan vs Karuppiah on 14 January, 2015

demand of dowry; the Trial Court ought to have ensured that such documents were marked in the manner known to law. 10. Therefore, the conclusion ... that the reliance placed upon by the Trial court on the unmarked documents for acquitting appellant No.1 was a serious error committed
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Regina vs Senthil on 21 September, 2015

mean that the documents have been received in evidence. Receiving the document in Court is different from receiving documents in evidence. Documents are received ... evidence. Unless they are received in evidence they remain unmarked documents. That is how, the trial Court has remarked that it should be received subject
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - P Devadass - Full Document

Prashanth vs Ramanatha Shenoy on 23 February, 2015

renewed by him subsequently. The respondent No.2 has produced documents at the time of arguments which are pertaining to information given by Yelahanka Traffic ... accident in Yelahanka Traffic police station does not arise. Thus, those unmarked documents do not help the respondent No.2 to prove his defence. SCCH
Bangalore District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Murugesan vs Gnanasekaran on 20 August, 2015

that certain relevant documents are available with the said suit. The suit was dismissed for default. These documents remain to unmarked. 3.The learned Rent ... before the learned Rent Controller. He also submitted that as the documents are unmarked, certified copies cannot be obtained, but, they are necessary
Madras High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - P Devadass - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next