Search Results for "Rajni Tandon"

8 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 8 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Disagrees with Rajni Tandon on Interpretation of 'Person Executing' under Section 32(a) of Registration Act, 1908. Power-of-Attorney Holder Not Executant; Authentication under Section 33 Required for Agent Presenting under Section 32(c).

The present appeals before the Supreme Court of India arose from a civil suit concerning the validity of an Irrevocable General Power of Attorney date...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Admission of Documents in Partition Suit — Secondary Evidence Permitted Under Section 65 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Documents Held Admissible as Certified Copies of Public Records or Where Plaintiff Failed to Produce Originals After Notice.

The suit was filed by Indira Rajguru against her brothers and sister for partition and declaration of rights in respect of properties. The matter came...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Partition Suit in Family Property Dispute — Plaintiff Entitled to 1/5th Share. Co-owner's Right to Partition Upheld Despite Unproven Allegations of Oral Partition and Will.

The suit was filed by Indira Rajguru, a resident of the United Kingdom, against her brothers and sister (defendants) for partition and separate posses...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Rules on Admissibility of Documents in Suit for Partition and Declaration of Rights. Documents not proved in accordance with Indian Evidence Act, 1872 cannot be admitted in evidence unless original is produced or foundation for secondary evidence is laid.

The suit was placed before the court for considering the admissibility of documents referred to and relied upon by defendant nos.3 and 4 in their comp...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Property Possession Suit Based on Title. Concurrent findings of courts below upheld as appellant failed to prove any substantial question of law under Section 100 CPC.

The case involves a second appeal filed by the defendant (appellant) against the concurrent findings of the trial court and first appellate court decr...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Reverses High Court's Decision in Property Title Dispute Due to Lack of Evidence on Power of Attorney. Concurrent Findings of Lower Courts Restored as Plaintiffs Failed to Prove Title and Compliance with Registration Act for Foreign-Executed Document.

The dispute originated from a civil suit filed by the original plaintiffs seeking declaration of title and recovery of possession over a property, all...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Land Encroachment Suit — Remands for Fresh Consideration Due to Failure to Frame Points for Determination. The appellate court's judgment was set aside for non-compliance with Order 41 Rule 31 CPC, and the matter was remanded for fresh disposal.

The original plaintiff (since deceased, represented by his legal heir) filed a suit for removal of encroachment against defendant nos.1 and 2, claimin...