Skip to content

Manjit Kaur V Durga - Law Dictionary Search Results

Research workspace

Save terms and build your research trail

A free trial unlocks notes, tags, search history, and the full AI Studio desk for judgment research.

Confession

exculpatory statement is of some fact, which if true, would negative the offence alleged to be confessed, Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1952 SC 354 (357). (Evidence Act, 1872, s. 24) The confession is a form

Domicile

intention to reside in a particular territory which is not transient or for a limited period only. Kirandeep Kaur v. Regional Passport Office, AIR 2006 Del 2. The term 'domicile' lends itself to illustrations but not to definition.

Person interested

directly or indirectly be interested either in the title of the land or in quantum of compensation, Gurmit Kaur v. State of Punjab, (1989) Punj LJ 704 (705) (P&H). Means it is not necessary that in order to

Keep your definitions linked to case research

Incuria

of the Constitution of India which embodies the doctrine of precedents as a matter of law, Nirmal Jeet Kaur v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2004) 7 SCC 558 (565).

Custody

physical hold of an officer with coercive power, is in custody for the purpose of s. 439, Nirmaljeet Kaur v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2004) 7 SCC 558. The word is of elastic semantics but its core meaning

Resides

implied something more than a brief visit but not such continuity as to amount to a domicile, Jagir Kaur v. Jaswant Singh, AIR 1963 SC 1521 (1524): (1964) 2 SCR 73. (iii) 'Resides' means to make an abode

Belong

ownership. It only denotes connection with property and is a term connecting a person with his possession, Surinder Kaur v. Madan Gopal Singh, AIR 1980 P&H 334.

Interested

the other convicted either because he had some animus with the accused or for some other reason, Dalbir Kaur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1977 SC 472: (1977) 1 SCR 280: (1976) 4 SCC 158. Interested, postulates that

Preliminary point

to dispose of the whole suit without the necessity of deciding other points involved in the case, Jit Kaur v. Kehar Singh, AIR 1951 Pepsu 364.

Receipt

by the postal peon at the address mentioned in the letter, M.P. Rajya Beej Ewam Farm Vikas Nigam v. Durga Transport Service, 1996 Jab LJ 146.

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

Try the research workspace - 7 days free


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial