.....examination of a person because his attorney / agent having been examined in chief is not available for cross-examination because of death, disease or otherwise; d) the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that his subject applications can be construed as the ones for summoning the plaintiff to depose as defendant’s witness is untenable; the privy council in mahunt shatrujan das vs. bewa sham das, air1938privy council59 observed that the practice of calling the defendant as a witness to give evidence on behalf of the plaintiff is condemnable; no special circumstances are pointed out as to why this judicial opinion emanating from enormous wisdom should not be respected and followed. in the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds; a writ of certiorari issues quashing the impugned order and respondent’s subject applications are dismissed. no costs. sd/- judge snb/ds
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....in our considered view, may not be appropriate. in our view, it is also erroneous that the national savings certificate doubles within 5 years. in fact, it does not. the national savings certificate carries a fixed rate of interest. to that 5.5% interest as accorded in section 51(1)(b) has been added. as stated herein above, 5.5% interest is not payable on any amount to the petitioners. it is a rate of interest that the bonds which will have to carry. therefore, we are of the view that the said judgment cannot be followed in the given facts and circumstances of the case.9. under these circumstances, even though the petitioners are liable to return the entire amount to the state along with 5.5% interest, due to the long passage of time, we do not find it appropriate to so order. however, the order of the assistant commissioner granting interest at the rate of 11.16% 11 requires to be set aside. even though the tahsildar has earlier granted 5.5% interest to the writ petitioners due to the passage of time, we do not think it proper to interfere with the same.10. for the aforesaid reasons, the writ appeal is allowed. the order of the learned single judge dated 07.10.2017 passed in.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....fdp no.6/2011 by the first additional civil judge and jmfc, chikodi.2. parties are referred to as per their rankings before the trial court.3. brief facts of the case are as follows : that the husband of the petitioner no.1(a) filed a suit in o.s.no.84/1967 for partition and separate possession on the file of the additional munsiff court, chikodi. the suit came to be decreed vide judgment and decree dated 27.6.1969 and awarded 1/5th share in the suit schedule properties. the defendants in o.s.no.84/1967 preferred r.a.no.258/1969 before the learned civil judge, belagavi. the appeal came to be dismissed on 15.6.1971. thereafter, in the year 1988 the original plaintiff filed an execution petition in e.p.no.46/1995 on the file of the munsiff and jmfc court, nipani to 7 execute the preliminary decree for partition. the said execution petition was treated as a final decree petition in respect of the house property. the trial court allowed the final decree petition and final decree was drawn on 6.8.1996 in respect of house property. 3.1. that, on 4.7.2011, petitioners filed fdp no.6/2011 before the learned civil judge, chikodi for drawing up final decree in terms of the preliminary.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....of enquiry into the hands of the 2nd 3 respondent lokayukta by the 1st respondent-government, the instant writ petition is filed.2. the material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy are as follows: the water resources department introduced a project called mullamari irrigation project in chincholi taluk, kalaburagi district, to provide water facilities for irrigation purpose. rehabilitation centres were established to provide shelters to the displaced families of the submerged land in respect of three villages in chincholi taluk. accordingly, the executive engineer/assistant executive engineer of respective divisions and sub- divisions were empowered to allot sites for displaced families. it transpires that on 20.4.2007, the then secretary and panchayat development officer (hereinafter referred to as ‘pdo’ for short) of gadalingadalli gramapanchayat on the direction of karnataka neeravari nigam limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘knnl’ for short) 4 issued a letter of allotment in respect of site no.86 along with sanctioned plan for construction of a house in favour smt. mahananda, w/o. adeppa huli under the rehabilitation scheme with certain.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....no direct evidence regarding the 8. involvement of the appellant in the crime. the case of the prosecution is on basis of circumstantial evidence. factors to be taken into account in adjudication of cases [6]. of circumstantial evidence as laid down by this court are1 : “14. admittedly, this is a case of circumstantial evidence. factors to be taken into account in adjudication of cases of circumstantial evidence laid down by this court are: (1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. the circumstances concerned “must” or “should” and not “may be” established; (2) the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty; (3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency; (4) they should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved; and 1 (2017) 14 scc359[7]. (5) there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....to try and determine the suit. the suit is exclusively triable by revenue court and, therefore, it deserves to be stayed. 2 xx xx xx on merits the facts which have not been specifically admitted shall be deemed to have been denied by necessary implication in the written statement hereinbelow.1. para 1 is admitted to the extent that the plaintiff is the owner of the land described in this para of the plaint. however, it may be submitted that the defendant is a tenant on payment of ½ galla-batai in respect of land measuring 13 bighas 2 biswas kitas 7 khewat khatauni no.1/1 khasra nos. 50(6 biswas), khasra no.51 (3 biswas) khasra no.302/52/1 (2 bighas), khasra no.302/52/3 (17 biswas), khasra no.303/52/1 (6 bighas 17 biswa), khasra no.52(2 bighas 10 biswas) and khasra no.68 (9 biswas) situate in village kannauri, pargana dhamer, tehsil and district shimla for the last more than 12 years. the defendant has nothing to do with the other land described in this para of the plaint. the entries made in the jamabandi 1981-82 referred to in this para in respect of the land described in this para of the written statement are not correct and are contrary to the facts on the spot." 5.6. the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....nos.2 to 4 in s.c.no.63/2008 being one and the same, 9 they are taken up for hearing together and are disposed of by this common judgment.5. the factual matrix according to the case put forth by the prosecution is as under: it transpires that on 18.03.2008 the senior intelligence officer of the directorate of revenue intelligence, mangalore (hereinafter referred to as ‘dri’ for brevity), had received credible information with regard to smuggling activities, i.e., trafficking of counterfeit indian currency notes through xps courier parcel service office, mangalore. acting on the said information, shri madhusudhan bhat being a senior intelligence officer of the dri had formed a team along with other officers and two panch witnesses and had rushed to the aforesaid xps courier office, mangalore, at 4.00 p.m. he had enquired with the concerned staff of the courier office with regard to receipt of a parcel from uae and was waiting there along with panch 10 witnesses. at about 4.30 p.m., two persons, i.e., accused nos.2 and 3 had come to the xps courier service office and had enquired about the parcel received from uae, dubai. the second accused had introduced himself to the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....nos.2 to 4 in s.c.no.63/2008 being one and the same, 9 they are taken up for hearing together and are disposed of by this common judgment.5. the factual matrix according to the case put forth by the prosecution is as under: it transpires that on 18.03.2008 the senior intelligence officer of the directorate of revenue intelligence, mangalore (hereinafter referred to as ‘dri’ for brevity), had received credible information with regard to smuggling activities, i.e., trafficking of counterfeit indian currency notes through xps courier parcel service office, mangalore. acting on the said information, shri madhusudhan bhat being a senior intelligence officer of the dri had formed a team along with other officers and two panch witnesses and had rushed to the aforesaid xps courier office, mangalore, at 4.00 p.m. he had enquired with the concerned staff of the courier office with regard to receipt of a parcel from uae and was waiting there along with panch 10 witnesses. at about 4.30 p.m., two persons, i.e., accused nos.2 and 3 had come to the xps courier service office and had enquired about the parcel received from uae, dubai. the second accused had introduced himself to the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....nos.2 to 4 in s.c.no.63/2008 being one and the same, 9 they are taken up for hearing together and are disposed of by this common judgment.5. the factual matrix according to the case put forth by the prosecution is as under: it transpires that on 18.03.2008 the senior intelligence officer of the directorate of revenue intelligence, mangalore (hereinafter referred to as ‘dri’ for brevity), had received credible information with regard to smuggling activities, i.e., trafficking of counterfeit indian currency notes through xps courier parcel service office, mangalore. acting on the said information, shri madhusudhan bhat being a senior intelligence officer of the dri had formed a team along with other officers and two panch witnesses and had rushed to the aforesaid xps courier office, mangalore, at 4.00 p.m. he had enquired with the concerned staff of the courier office with regard to receipt of a parcel from uae and was waiting there along with panch 10 witnesses. at about 4.30 p.m., two persons, i.e., accused nos.2 and 3 had come to the xps courier service office and had enquired about the parcel received from uae, dubai. the second accused had introduced himself to the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....hands including mortgagee buying, sold in court auction and all those things never were tested on the side of title. on the other hand the series of facts are unilateral insofar as claiming of title is concerned.23. the litigation as stated above was started regarding the title of the plaintiffs who claimed to be the owners of the schedule property along with 21 others. in this connection the relevant aspects are already stated above.24. learned counsel for appellants sri.k.chandranath ariga would submit that the title of the plaintiffs is clearly evidenced by ex.p-1 wherein recognition of the title is made loud and clear. he would further submit that the ownership of the plaintiffs was recognized by the revenue authorities as well. further the nature of title of the plaintiffs originated from javanna stated to be kodigedar of the tank and it is also stated money was also received at various intervals for repairing tank right from the year 1888.25. learned counsel further submits that when the transaction in series spread over for more than 100 years it was not challenged and nobody questioned. when defendant no.2-bda started forming layout and 22 started interfering with the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT