Part 08

IMPORTANT DECISIONS

 Ad interim injunction - A direction to pay money either by way of final or interim order, is not considered to be an 'injunction'. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 570 (S.C.)

 Affidavit - Written in English and signed in Hindi cannot be read into evidence when there is nothing in the text that it was explained to him. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 512 (P&H)

 Affidavit of witnesses - Party has a choice as to number of witnesses to be examined - Party cannot be directed to file affidavit of all the witnesses at one and the same time. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 496 (Bombay)

 Appeal - Stay - Where serious civil consequences follow from an order, it is imperative for the Appellate Court to suspend the operation of the order more so when appeal is admitted. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 429 (Allahabad)

 Civil case - When a civil dispute is pending adjudication before the competent authority, the revenue authorities should not interfere with the matter. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 384 (A.P.)

 Civil suit and criminal proceedings u/s 138 NI Act - Acquittal u/s 138 NI Act - Does not operate as res judicata - Plaint cannot be rejected. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 311 (S.C.)

 Dishonour of cheque - Cash loan - Not disclosed in Income Tax Return - Liability to repay unaccounted cash amount is not a legally enforceable liability - Debt is not legally recoverable debt. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 563 (Bombay)

 Dishonour of cheque - Cheque undated at the time it was drawn - Does not mean that it was given without consideration. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 529 (Delhi)

 Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Intimation received on 3.12.2003 and notice issued on 2.1.2004 - Notice is issued on 31st day - Complaint not maintainable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 436 (S.C.)

 Divorce by mutual consent - Appeal against - Held, maintainable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 402 (Bombay)

 Electricity - Back billing - Provisional assessment not made - Details as to the manner of arriving at the demanded amount not given - Time to file objections not given - Opportunity of hearing not given - Assessing Officer to decide afresh in accordance with law. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 303 (Karnataka)

 Electricity consumption - Abnormal increase - No written complaint ever filed - In absence thereof meter reading bind both the parties - Suit dismissed. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 413 (Rajasthan)

 Evidence closed by order - Court on a proper consideration of facts can reopen the case and allow a party to lead evidence when a party shows reasons for its inability to give evidence. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 474 (P&H)

 Family settlement - Error alleged to have been committed in effecting a settlement in ignorance of provisions of Hindu Succession Act - Family settlement would operate as an estoppel preventing parties thereto from disavowing its contents. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 418 (P&H)

 Institution of suit by Company through power of attorney - For institution of suit power of attorney is not required to be registered. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 522 (Allahabad) (DB)

 Lack of proper identification of suit property - Plaint not to be rejected at the threshold. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 430 (P&H)

 Maintenance pendente lite - Not for sustenance only - Maintenance is granted to ensure that the spouse enjoys the same monetary status and facilities as she or he was enjoying prior to separation. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 550 (Delhi)

 Maintenance pendente lite - Wife agreed to accept a lesser amount as interim maintenance in a petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C. - Held, any consented fixture of interim maintenance cannot, by any stretch of interpretation, disable the wife from raising a plea for the award of higher maintenance in the proceedings u/s 24 of the Act. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 469 (P&H)

 Plaint - Amendment - Cause of action arising during pendency of suit - Stands on a different footing than the one which had arisen prior to the date of institution of the suit. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 294 (S.C.)

 Plaint - Amendment - Suit for permanent injunction sought to be converted to suit for specific performance as cause of action accrued during pendency of suit - Amendment allowed. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 426 (P&H)

 Plaint - Amendment - Third party sought to be introduced by way of amendment - It is not only O.6.R.17 but also O.1.R.10 CPC which is applicable and period of limitation also comes in. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 294 (S.C.)

 Rebuttal evidence - Plaintiff is entitled to lead evidence in rebuttal in the form of expert witness on the issue, the onus of which was on the defendant. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 380 (P&H)

 Right of way - Does not extend to open doors and windows - Neither of the parties have right to put any obstruction in the disputed passage by constructing any wall or otherwise. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 318 (Allahabad)

 Self drawn cheque - Endorsed in favour of complainant - Cheque dishonoured - Drawer of cheque is guilty of offence u/s 138 of the Act. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 370 (Karnataka)

 Succession certificate - Petition decided by Civil Judge in exercise of delegated power of District Judge - Appeal against - Lies to District Judge and not to High Court. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 508 (P&H)

 Will - Coparcenary/ancestral property - A male Hindu governed by Mitakshara system is not debarred from making a Will in respect of coparcenary/ancestral property. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 535 (S.C.)

SUBJECT INDEX

Adverse possession

 Adverse possession - A person who enters possession under colour of title possessory or proprietary, whether perceived or assumed shall not thereafter be heard or urge that his possession is adverse to the possessory and proprietary rights of the true owner - Possession under colour of title, inheres in the trespasser, a belief that his possession is legal and valid - An assertion of adverse possessory title would, therefore, be a contradiction in terms. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 418 (P&H)

Affidavit

 Affidavit - Rejoinder affidavit - An opportunity has to be granted to file rejoinder affidavit - Dismissal of writ petition only on the basis of counter affidavit without affording an opportunity to file rejoinder affidavit is ex facie against the principles of fair play - Impugned order set aside - Opportunity given to file rejoinder affidavit. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 375 (Allahabad) (DB) Agreement to sell

 Agreement to sell - Specific performance - Three ingredients required for relief of specific performance are : (i) there should be validly executed agreement to sell; (ii) passing of consideration pursuant to such agreement should be conclusively established; and (iii) willingness and readiness of the vendee to perform his part of contract should also be established. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 525 (P&H)

Civil Cases

 Civil case - When a civil dispute is pending adjudication before the competent authority, the revenue authorities should not interfere with the matter. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 384 (A.P.)

Civil Procedure Code, 1908

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.10 - Stay of subsequent suit - Description of property in dispute in both the suits different - Plea that there is change of khasra and khatauni numbers which are duly explained - Held, at the stage of deciding application u/s 10 CPC there is no evidence or document on record to prove the plea - Plea repelled. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 385 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.10 - Stay of subsequent suit - Suit property and parties in both suits different - Even relief claimed in both suits different - Relief claimed in the second suit not the subject matter of first suit - Dismissal of application - Order upheld. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 385 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Ss.11, O.7.R.11(d) - Civil suit and criminal proceedings u/s 138 NI Act - Acquittal in criminal case - Does not operate as res judicata in civil suit - Plaint cannot be rejected - Finding in a criminal proceeding is not binding in a civil proceeding - Standard of proof in a civil suit and criminal proceedings is different - In a criminal case the prosecution is bound to prove the commission of the offence on the part of the accused beyond any reasonable doubt - In a civil suit preponderance of probability would serve the purpose for obtaining a decree. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 311 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.60(1)(ccc) - Dwelling house - Exemption from attachment - Decree of specific performance - Sale deed executed on intervention of Court - Execution for possession - Exemption from attachment of dwelling house is not available when decree is executed for delivery of property decreed. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 388 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.60(1)(ccc) - Dwelling house - Exemption from attachment - Provision is applicable to money decrees only when dwelling house is not charged specifically and not when execution is made by delivery of the property decreed. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 388 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.96 - Appeal - High Court summarily dismissing appeal without going into the vital issues - Not sustainable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 570 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.100 - Second appeal - Joint family Property - Partition - Concurrent findings of Courts below that there was no partition in between the parties and joint nature of the property continues - Held, finding regrading jointness of the property in the absence of any family partition requires no interference in second appeal since the findings are based on the evidence on record and is not disputed by the appellants. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 498 (Allahabad)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.100 - Second appeal - Non registration of a document - It is a mixed question of fact and law - Must be pleaded and proved - The question of non registration of a document cannot be raised for the first time in second appeal. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 418 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.151, O.18.R.1 - Evidence closed by order - Court on a proper consideration of facts can reopen the case and allow a party to lead evidence when a party shows reasons for its inability to give evidence. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 474 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.1.R.10 - Impleading of a party - Added defendant is deemed to be added from the date of service of summons on him - After the proposed defendants are added, they have a right to agitate the question whether the suit is within limitation as against them or not. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 378 (Bombay)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.1.R.10 - Impleading of a party - Suit instituted in the name of a wrong plaintiff or defendant - Held, the right plaintiff or defendant can be added as plaintiff or defendant. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 378 (Bombay)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.6.Rr.1, 2, O.8.R.2 - Proof beyond pleading - New defence is not permissible when necessary foundation is not laid in the pleading and other side is not put to notice by any suggestion in the cross examination. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 344 (Bombay)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.6.R.17 - Plaint - Amendment - Agreement to sell - Amendment sought to convert suit for permanent injunction to suit for specific performance as cause of action accrued during pendency of suit - Plaintiff could have filed a fresh suit - Court can allow amendment after commencement of trial to avoid multiplicity of proceedings - Order allowing amendment, upheld. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 426 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.6.R.17 - Plaint - Amendment - Altering basic structure of the suit - Held, such an amendment is impermissible. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 294 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.6.R.17 - Plaint - Amendment - Can be allowed at any stage before judgment is pronounced if Court comes to a conclusion that amendment is necessary for complete and effectual disposal of the case and that by allowing amendment, no prejudice would be caused to the defendants. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 329 (Kerala)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.6.R.17 - Plaint - Amendment - Cause of action arising during pendency of suit - Stands on a different footing than the one which had arisen prior to the date of institution of the suit. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 294 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.6.R.17 - Plaint - Amendment - Sought to change description of suit property in a suit for permanent injunction - Can be allowed at any stage before judgment is pronounced - No valuable right accrues to the defendant due to boundary description and there is no admission which is sought to be taken away - Order allowing amendment, upheld. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 329 (Kerala)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.6.R.17 - Plaint - Amendment - Third party sought to be introduced by way of amendment - It is not only O.6.R.17 but also O.1.R.10 CPC which is applicable and period of limitation also comes in. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 294 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.6.R.17 - Written statement - Amendment - Version in conflict with public document sought to be deleted so as to bring the earlier statements in conformity with the documents - Order allowing amendment, upheld. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 391 (Karnataka)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.7.Rr.11, 3 - Rejection of plaint - Lack of proper identification of suit property - Plaint cannot be rejected - Court can either ask plaintiff to supply the identity of the property or could decide the suit on the basis of the evidence and if Court comes to a conclusion that the property is not properly identified, it could have declined to pass a decree. (Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Orders, Volume-I, chapter-I, Part-C, Paragraph 9). 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 430 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.8.R.5 - Written statement - Allegations of fact made in plaint - If not denied may be taken to be admitted. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 498 (Allahabad)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.12.R.6, Contract Act, 1872, Ss.148, 151 & 152 - Suit for damages - Destruction of certain antique pieces of furniture - Antique pieces of furniture hired for a film under production - Case of bailment made out - It is for defendants to show that they had taken all proper care and precaution - It would be matter which requires consideration of Court during trial - No decree on admission can be passed. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 447 (Bombay) (DB)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.12.R.6 - Decree on admission - Admission must be unambiguous and definite admission - A decree on inferences cannot be passed - In absence of an unambiguous and definite admission of liability and quantum, it would be difficult for the Court to pass a decree on such basis. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 447 (Bombay) (DB)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.12.R.6 - Decree on admission - Provision not to be used when vexed and complicated questions or issues of law arise and it does not contemplate passing of interim orders. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 447 (Bombay) (DB)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.13.Rr.3, 4 - Admissibility and mode of proof - Object as to - Must be taken at the trial before it is received in evidence and marked as an exhibit. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 535 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.13.R.4 - Simply because a document is exhibited, its mode of proof cannot be dispensed with - Document when not legally proved cannot be read into evidence. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 453 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.16.R.6 - Summons to produce documents - Person so summoned does not become a witness - Cannot be cross examined unless and until he is called as a witness. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 556 (A.P.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.16.R.6 - Summons to produce documents - Person so summoned need not personally attend Court - He may cause production of documents summoned. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 556 (A.P.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.18.R.3 - Rebuttal evidence - Agreement to sell - Alleged to be false and fabricated - Onus to prove on defendant - Expert witness sought to be examined in rebuttal - Held, unless a party leads evidence in support of the plea raised by him in terms of the onus put on him as per the issues framed, no evidence in defence can possibly be led - Plaintiff cannot pre-suppose and lead evidence at the initial stage in anticipation of the evidence to be lead by the defendant - Plaintiff is entitled to lead evidence in rebuttal in the form of expert witness on the issue, the onus of which was on the defendant. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 380 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.18.R.3 - Rebuttal evidence - Plaintiff while leading evidence if touches some issues the onus of which is on the defendant then it cannot be said that plaintiff had led evidence on those issues - It is only after the defendant has led his evidence that plaintiff will come to know the same and get an opportunity to rebut the same. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 380 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.18.R.4 - Witnesses - Party has a choice as to number of witnesses to be examined - Party cannot be directed to file affidavit of all the witnesses at one and the same time. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 496 (Bombay)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.19.R.1 - Affidavit - Signed in Hindi but written in English - Such an affidavit is absolutely ambiguous being in complete violation of the provision of O.19.R.1 CPC - AIR 1990 Calcutta 37 followed wherein held that an affidavit which is written in English and signed in Hindi cannot be read into evidence when there is nothing in the text that it was explained to him. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 512 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.21.R.58 - Execution - Attachment - Objections to attachment - Maintainable only when property is not sold - No claim or objection is maintainable when property attached is already sold. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 568 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.22.R.9, Limitation Act, 1963, Art.121, S.5 - Death of two respondents during pendency of appeal - Delay of 2381 and 2601 days in bringing L.R's on record - Appellants were neighbours and co-sharers - Date of death was known to them - Held, ignorance of legal consequences not sufficient to condone such a huge delay. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 441 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.22.R.9 - Appeal - Abatement for not bringing on record L.R's of deceased respondent - Setting aside abatement - Condonation of delay - Different considerations arise for a suit and an appeal - Such an application should be considered liberally. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 441 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.22.R.10-A - Non compliance with the provision - Consequences are not provided - The provision does not take away the duty on the part of the plaintiff or the appellant to file an application for condonation of delay in bringing on record the heirs and legal representatives of a deceased plaintiff/appellant or defendant/respondent within the period prescribed. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 441 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.23.R.1, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Ss.13 & 24 - Divorce petition - Withdrawal of petition by husband after pendency of proceedings for eight years - Maintenance pendente lite granted to wife not paid - No justification for withdrawal of petition - Order allowing withdrawal set aside. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 416 (Karnataka)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.23.R.1 - Formal defect - Means a defect of form unrelated to the claim of the plaintiff on merits. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 395 (A.P.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.23.R.1 - Formal defect - Withdrawal of suit - Formal defect must be mentioned in the application - When application is silent on this material point the same cannot be entertained by the Court. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 547 (Bombay)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.23.R.1 - Withdrawal of suit with permission to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action - Can be allowed only when Court is satisfied that suit must fail by reason of some formal defect - Such satisfaction of Court is mandatory. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 395 (A.P.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.23.R.1 - Withdrawal of suit without seeking permission of Court to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action - Plaintiff is precluded from filing any fresh suit in respect of such subject matter or such part of the claim - The words used by the Legislature in this provision of law are "same subject matter" and not "same cause of action". 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 453 (P&H)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.29.R.1, O.6.Rr.14, 15, O.7.R.11 - Company/Corporation - Institution of suit through power of attorney - For institution of suit power of attorney is not required to be registered - Suit cannot be dismissed on the ground that power of attorney is not registered - However, Court can call upon the company/corporation to file an affidavit of competency, which is desirable but Court cannot outrightly reject the plaint - Impugned order rejecting plaint set aside. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 522 (Allahabad) (DB)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.37.R.3 - Summary suit on the basis of cheque - Leave to defend - When defence raises a triable issue leave must be granted unconditionally whether the defence is legal or equitable and even through it may not ultimately turn out to be a good defence. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 465 (Delhi)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.39.Rr.1,2 - Ad interim injunction - An order to deposit arrears of rent in Court and to pay interest in case of non deposit - Not an order of 'injunction' - A direction to pay money either by way of final or interim order, is not considered to be an 'injunction'. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 570 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.39.R.2-A, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Money decree or order for payment of money - Contempt jurisdiction either under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 or U.O.39.R.2-A CPC not to be used for enforcement of money decrees or directions/orders of repayment of money - The process and concept of execution is different from process and concept of action for disobedience/contempt. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 570 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.39.R.2-A, O.21.R.46 - Amount due by a garnishee, if disputed has to be determined as if it was an issue in the suit and the court can by an appropriate order determine the extent of liability of the garnishee - In the instant case there was no adjudication of the amount payable by FCI - Plaintiff bank having no complaint or grievance - Application U.O.39.R.2-A CPC is not maintainable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 570 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.39.R.2-A - Breach of injunction - Application U.O.39.R.2-A CPC is maintainable only when there is disobedience of any order of injunction granted U.O.39.R.1 or Rule 2 or breach of any of the terms on which the injunction was granted or the order was made. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 570 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.39.R.2-A - Breach of injunction - Exercise of power U.O.39.R.2-A CPC is punitive in nature, akin to the power to punish for civil contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - It has to be proved that there was an order of injunction with a direction to do or desist from doing some specific thing or act - It has to be proved that there was disobedience or breach of such order - Court cannot construe the order of which violation is alleged as creating an obligation to do something which is not mentioned in the order - Person who complains of disobedience or breach has to clearly make out beyond any doubt that there was an injunction or order - Court cannot construe the order in regard to which disobedience/breach is alleged, as creating an obligation to do something which is not mentioned in the 'order', on surmises suspicions and inferences - The power U.O.39.R.2-A CPC should be exercised with great caution and responsibility. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 570 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.39.R.2-A - Breach of injunction - Interim order passed on an application filed by plaintiff - Plaintiff did not complain of any disobedience or breach of the order - Interim order not intended for benefit of co-defendant - Co-defendant has no locus standi to invoke O.39.R.2-A CPC. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 570 (S.C.)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.41.R.5 - Appeal - Stay - Where serious civil consequences follow from an order, it is imperative for the Appellate Court to suspend the operation of the order more so when appeal is admitted. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 429 (Allahabad)

 Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.41.R.19 - Restoration of appeal dismissed in default - Serious illness of elder brother who died on the following day when the appeal was fixed for hearing - Also wife of appellant met with an accident due to which he was busy in attending her for almost one and half months - Held, explanation for non appearance and delay, the application for restoration ought to be have been allowed. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 302 (S.C.)

Civil suit and criminal proceedings

 Civil suit and criminal proceedings - A creditor can maintain a civil and criminal proceedings at the same time - Both the proceedings can run parallely. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 311 (S.C.)

Constitution of India

 Constitution of India, Arts.226, 227 - Civil suit - Whether High Court in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction can interfere with a judicial order passed by a civil court of competent jurisdiction - Matter referred to a larger bench. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 364 (S.C.)

Consumer Protection Act, 1986

 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Prior to 2002 amendment), Ss.2(1)(d), 2(1)(g) - Consumer - Deficiency in service - Non supply of electricity by Power Transmission Corporation to manufacturing company within time fixed under contract - Amounts to deficiency of service - Company is competent to maintain a complaint regrading such deficiency in service in a Consumer Forum. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 336 (S.C.)

 Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Ss.2(1)(m), 2(1)(d), 3, General Clauses Act, 1897, S.3(42) - Company - Can be consumer and can maintain complaint. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 336 (S.C.)

Contract Act, 1872

 Contract Act, 1872, S.62 - Novation of contract - Person who sets up a defence of substitution or novation or rescission of an earlier contract, he has to first admit the existence of a contract. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 525 (P&H)

 Contract Act, 1872, Ss.73, 74 - Loss suffered for not carrying out obligation as per agreement - Suit for refund of earnest money - By subsequent agreement defendant agreed for refund of earnest money - Defendant did not place any counter claim or set off nor led any evidence for pointing out what actual loss he has suffered on account of plaintiff's not fulfilling his contractual obligation - Suit decreed. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 514 (Bombay) (DB)

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.125 - Maintenance - Recovery - For each month of default of payment of maintenance, it is open to Magistrate to sentence the defaulting person to imprisonment for a period of one month or until payment if sooner made. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 348 (Gujarat) (FB)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.125 - Maintenance - Recovery - Magistrate can entertain separate application for each months default or can entertain a common application for several months of default and sentence a defaulting person upto a maximum one month for each month of default. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 348 (Gujarat) (FB)

 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.125 - Maintenance - Revisional Court set aside the order of maintenance on ground of non service on husband - Order having been set aside, no justification for revisional court to direct husband to pay interim maintenance upto the date of order for maintenance - Held, impugned order set aside being illegal - Matter sent back for decision afresh. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 343 (Rajasthan)

East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949

 East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, S.13 - Eviction - If different portions of one integrated building had been let out to different tenants, then all the tenants could be evicted. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 376 (P&H)

 East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, S.13 - Eviction - Two shops - Tenant is entitled to evict tenants from both the shops to erect the shopping complex-cum-residence - Fact that one portion of the building had become available even before filing of the petition would not be a factor to discount the requirement of the landlord. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 376 (P&H)

 East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, S.13 - Sub tenancy is heritable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 298 (P&H)

 East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, S.13 - Sub tenancy - Premises sub let before coming into force of Act - Tenant cannot be ejected on ground of sub-letting - Death of sub tenant - Son of sub-tenant who came to occupy after death of sub-tenant is also protected - Content that sub tenancy is not heritable not tenable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 298 (P&H)

 East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, S.13 - Sub-letting - Tenant is landlord qua sub-tenant. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 298 (P&H)

 East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, S.13-B - NRI landlord - Landlord born at Rawalpindi (now part of Pakistan) and shifted to U.K. - He comes within the definition of NRI because at the time of birth of landlord Rawalpindi was part of India. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 376 (P&H)

Electricity Act, 1910

 Electricity Act, 1910, S.26(3) - Electricity consumption - Abnormal increase as compared to previous consumption - Electricity bill challenged - No written complaint ever filed that meter is defective and not recording correct electricity consumption - In absence thereof meter reading bind both the parties - Suit dismissed. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 413 (Rajasthan)

Electricity Act, 2003

 Electricity Act, 2003, S.126 - Electricity - Back billing amount - Demand notice - Straightaway issuance of demand notice is not as per law - Board to issue a provisional assessment order containing all the details as to the manner of arriving at the demanded amount and the reason for charging penal rate - Without such details, provisional assessment order itself is bad in law - Consumer is entitled to file objections to the provisional assessment - Assessing Officer after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to such person has to pass a final order. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 303 (Karnataka)

Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948

 Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, S.49, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, S.2(1)(d)(i) and (ii) - Statutes - Interpretation - Title of provision or marginal note - Do not afford legitimate aid to construction of the provision - Use of expression in S.49 of the Act "supply of electricity" cannot be automatically understood as sale, merely because marginal note to the section calls it "sale" - It can be interpreted as "service" as defined in the Act of 1986. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 336 (S.C.)

Evidence Act, 1872

 Evidence Act, 1872, Ss.40 to 43 - Finding in a criminal proceeding - Not binding in a civil proceeding. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 311 (S.C.)

 Evidence Act, 1872, Ss.106, 114 - Adverse inference - Document having direct bearing on the relief claimed - Not brought on record at the first instance - Naturally raises the suspicion of the Court that the document is a fictitious document. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 498 (Allahabad)

 Evidence Act, 1872, S.112 - Presumption - If the husband had access to wife, children cannot be termed illegitimate merely on account of adultery of wife - Presumption can be displaced only by proof of non-access - Non access can be proved like any other physical fact by evidence, either direct or circumstantial- Proof of non-access must be clear and satisfactory. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 535 (S.C.)

Family settlement

 Family settlement - Error alleged to have been committed in effecting a settlement in ignorance of provisions of Hindu Succession Act - Ignorance of rights flowing from Hindu Succession Act cannot be a ground to set aside a family settlement - Family settlement would operate as an estoppel preventing parties thereto from disavowing its contents. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 418 (P&H)

 Family settlement - In a family settlement family members resolve their differences and decide to apportion property amongst its members, irrespective of rights or shares actual or perceived flowing from the Hindu Succession Act - A settlement may confer rights upon members of the family, who have a possible or perceived claim to property, which would then be deemed to have been acknowledged by parties to the settlement - The Hindu Succession Act does not place an embargo on parties disavowing rights flowing therefrom and parties are free to settle their property disputes by diminishing or enhancing their shares - If adherence to rights, as set out under the Hindu Succession Act, were to be held to be inviolable or sufficient to disavow a family settlement, it would negate the very concept of a family settlement. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 418 (P&H)

Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956

 Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, S.16 - Adoption - Registered document - There is a valid presumption in favour of such document - Petitioner having miserably failed to dislodge the same, the adoption cannot be discarded. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 424 (Allahabad)

 Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, Ss.18, 20 - Maintenance - Court Fee - Claim for maintenance is to be treated as a petition and not a suit - Court Fee Act is not applicable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 324 (J&K)

Hindu Law

 Hindu Law - Partition - Minors through mother filed suit for partition - Father sold property during pendency of suit - Trial Court passed preliminary decree holding that two plaintiffs and father is entitled to 1/3rd share each and that plaintiffs are entitled to separate possession of 2/3rd share after division - Sale executed, held, binding only on father and not on plaintiff and that purchasers are entitled to equity at the time of partition to have a charge over 1/3 share of the vendor - Appeal by purchasers - During pendency of appeal minors became major - It is for them to decide whether to further proceed with the litigation - Decree of trial Court set aside - Plaintiffs entitled to amend the pleadings including the appellants - Trial Court directed to settle additional issues if necessary and both parties allowed to lead further evidence on all issues - Case remanded back for decision afresh. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 481 (A.P.)

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Ss.13-B, 23(1)(bb) - Divorce by mutual consent - Court must satisfy itself on the very first date when Court adjourns the matter for conciliation or for waiting of statutory period that consent for divorce has not been obtained by force, fraud or undue influence and must so reveal in its order. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 402 (Bombay)

 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Ss.13-B, 28 - Divorce by mutual consent - Appeal against - Held, maintainable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 402 (Bombay)

 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.24 - Maintenance pendente lite - Able bodied husband is legally bound to provide for his wife and children who have no means of sustenance which is to include the living arrangement and other facilities in day-to-day life which they were enjoying during happier times when the family was united. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 469 (P&H)

 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.24 - Maintenance pendente lite - Maintenance granted is not only for sustenance and for contesting the litigation - Maintenance is granted to ensure that the spouse enjoys the same monetary status and facilities as she or he was enjoying prior to separation. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 550 (Delhi)

 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.24 - Maintenance pendente lite - Maintenance is granted to secure to a wife/spouse, as far as possible, the status and facilities enjoyed by her prior to her separation from her husband when her maintenance claim is finally determined - The determination of maintenance not being governed by any rigid or inflexible rule gives wide power and discretion to the Court to do justice. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 550 (Delhi)

 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.24 - Maintenance pendente lite - Principles governing : (i) Maintenance depends upon the summation of all the facts of the situation; (ii) For granting maintenance, the scale and mode of living, the age, habits, wants and class of the life of the parties has to be regarded; (iii) Maintenance being such that the wife could live in a reasonable comfort; considering her status and mode of life which she was used to while living with her husband; (iv) During the pendency of the suit for maintenance, which may take a considerable time to attain finality, the wife cannot be forced to face starvation till she is subsequently granted maintenance from the date of the filing of the suit; (v) Maintenance must necessarily encompass a provision for residence. Maintenance is given so that the lady can live in the manner, more or less, to which she was accustomed; (vi) Maintenance, necessarily must encompass a provision for residence - Maintenance is given so that the lady can live in the manner, more or less, to which she was accustomed. The concept of maintenance must, therefore, include provision for food and clothing and the like and take into account the basic need of a roof over the head; (vii) Maintenance must vary according to the position and status of a person. It does not only mean food and raiment. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 550 (Delhi)

 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.24 - Maintenance pendente lite - Wife agreed to accept a lesser amount as interim maintenance in a petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C. - Held, any consented fixture of interim maintenance cannot, by any stretch of interpretation, disable the wife from raising a plea for the award of higher maintenance in the proceedings u/s 24 of the Act. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 469 (P&H)

Hindu Succession Act, 1956

 Hindu Succession Act, 1956, S.15(1) - Self acquired property of a widow dying intestate - Cannot be inherited by succession - It would go to the heirs of the pre-deceased husband. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 371 (S.C.)

 Hindu Succession Act, 1956, S.15(1) and (2) - Self acquired property of a woman - Self acquired property of a female is her absolute property and not the property which she had inherited from her parents. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 371 (S.C.)

Limitation Act, 1963

 Limitation Act, 1963, S.14, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, S.34 - Arbitration award - Setting aside - Delay - Condonation - Party prosecuting remedy before wrong forum on a wrong advice of counsel - S.5 of Limitation Act is not applicable - However, S.14 of Limitation Act is applicable to proceedings under Arbitration Act - Delay condoned u/s 14 of Limitation Act. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 542 (P&H)

 Limitation Act, 1963, S.18 - Acknowledgement - Time barred debt - Debtor can always agree to pay a time barred debt for which no consideration is required - Promise to pay time barred debt can always be considered as a valid contract. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 514 (Bombay) (DB)

 Limitation Act, 1963, Art.58 - Suit for declaration - Mutation and Will challenged - Mutation sanctioned on 20.2.1988 and Will dated 4.12.1978 - Suit filed on 21.5.1991 - Neither any pleading nor evidence as to the date on which the plaintiff derived knowledge about the mutation and/or the Will - Held, suit is not filed within time. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 535 (S.C.)

 Limitation Act, 1963, Arts.120 & 121 - Appeal - Abatement for not bringing on record L.R's within time - Application to set aside abatement of appeal filed within time - Held, application is not maintainable where condonation of delay in bringing legal representative of deceased respondent was not sought for by making separate application - It is open to applicant to seek condonation of delay to pursue appeal. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 412 (Karnataka)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.4 - Pronote - Long standing dispute between parties even prior to execution of pronote and receipt - Held, if it was so neither the defendant could approach the plaintiff for borrowing the amount in dispute nor the latter could give such a huge amount as a loan to the defendant. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 321 (P&H)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.4, 87 - Pronote - Material alteration in the name of father of plaintiff - Not explained as to under what circumstances it had crept - If this alteration had been introduced at the time of execution of pronote the initials/signatures of defendant would have been obtained to authenticate these material alterations - In absence of any such explanation presumption is that the material alteration was made subsequently which makes the pronote void. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 321 (P&H)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Self drawn cheque endorsed in favour of complainant - Cheque dishonoured - Drawer of cheque is guilty of offence u/s 138 of the Act - Possessor of a self drawn cheque comes within the definition of 'Holder in due course'. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 370 (Karnataka)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cash loan - Not disclosed in Income Tax Return - Liability to repay unaccounted cash amount is not a legally enforceable liability - Debt is not legally recoverable debt. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 563 (Bombay)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque undated at the time it was drawn - Does not mean that it was given without consideration. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 529 (Delhi)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - Can be filed through holder of power of attorney - Such attorney can also be examined in place of complainant if he has personal knowledge of the transaction in question or the bills had been signed by him. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 307 (Bombay)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Dismissal in default - Date wrongly noted by counsel - A party should not suffer because of negligence of his counsel - It would be too harsh on the petitioner to non suit him merely for his non appearance on one date - Complaint restored to its original number. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 495 (P&H)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - 30 days - Use of words in the provision is 'within' and not 'from' - Intimation from bank received on 3.12.2003 and notice issued on 2.1.2004 - Held, notice was issued on 31st day and not within 30 days from the date of receipt of intimation from bank - Complaint not maintainable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 436 (S.C.)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Originally issued of a/c No.1242 - This a/c No. scored off and instead thereof a/c No.1367 incorporated which also belonged to accused - Cutting not authenticated by accused - Accused never intended to issue cheque in relation to his account No.1367 to discharge his outstanding legal liability and dishonour of the same for insufficient funds does not fasten any criminal liability upon him - It is immaterial that cutting in the account number does not require any authentication by the accused. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 455 (P&H)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Suspicious circumstances surrounding the transection - No satisfactory explanation tendered by the holder of the instrument - Conviction is not legally permissible, solely banking upon the statutory presumption - Court is expected to examine whether the transaction covered by the cheque is genuine and bona fide. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 459 (Kerala)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Undated cheque - Cheque is deemed to be drawn on the date mentioned on the cheque and not on the date the undated cheque was handed over. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 529 (Delhi)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Undated cheque - Drawer of an undated cheque gives a prima facie authority to fill in the date. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 529 (Delhi)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.386 - Suspension of sentence during pendency of appeal - Dishonour of cheque - Accused convicted - Appeal against - Sentence suspended during pendency of appeal. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 562 (P&H)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, 139 - Dishonour of cheque - Execution denied - Burden is on the complainant to prove that the instrument was duly executed by the maker. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 459 (Kerala)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 139 - Dishonour of cheque - Presumption u/s 139 of the Act - In case amount is large and amount advanced is not repayable within few months, then failure to disclose the amount in Income-Tax return or Books of account of the complainant may be sufficient to rebut the presumption u/s 139 of the Act. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 563 (Bombay)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 139 - Dishonour of cheque - Presumption - Rebuttal - For rebutting the presumption it is not necessary in every case for the accused to step into the witness box - Standard of proof on the part of accused and that of a prosecution in a criminal case is different. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 563 (Bombay)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 139 - Dishonour of cheque - Presumption - There is no presumption u/s 139 of the Act that the debt is a legally recoverable debt. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 563 (Bombay)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 139 - Dishonour of cheque - Transaction and handing over of cheque totally denied - Veracity of the prosecution case as to transaction and execution of cheque has to be examined in reference to the materials tendered by the prosecution. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 459 (Kerala) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, S.2(q) - Respondent - Means an adult male having relation with complainant - Proceedings against females quashed - Objection as to jurisdiction to be raised before trial Court. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 458 (Rajasthan)

 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, S.27 - Jurisdiction - Court at place where applicant has temporary residence has jurisdiction to try the case - No reason to transfer the case to any other Court. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 511 (Rajasthan)

Right of way

 Right of way - Does not extend to open doors and windows in the passage to have free and extra air and light - Neither of the parties have right to put any obstruction in the disputed passage by constructing any wall or otherwise. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 318 (Allahabad)

Stamp Act, 1899

 Stamp Act, 1899 - Applicability of Stamp Act - Two guiding principles for applicability of the Act in respect of a particular document are : (1) The Court is not bound by the apparent tenor of an instrument, it shall decide according to the real nature or substance of the document; and (2) The duty is on the instrument and not on the transaction. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 503 (Allahabad)

 Stamp Act, 1899 - Principles governing the application of Stamp Act to the instrument - AIR 1970 MP 74 followed wherein held : (i) The first rule is that duty is payable on the instrument and not on the transaction; (ii) The second rule is that the Court is not (sic) by the apparent tenor of the instrument, it is the real nature of the transaction which will determine the stamp duty; (iii) The third rule is that the Court must look at the document itself as it stands and it is not permissible to show, by evidence, any collateral circumstances; (iv) The fourth rule is that in determining the stamp duty, the substance of the transaction as disclosed by the whole of the instrument has to be looked to, and not merely the operative parts of the instrument; (v) The fifth rule is that stamp duty is payable on an instrument according to its tenor and it does not matter that it cannot be given effect to for some independent cause; (vi) The sixth rule is that there can be no objection to a device effectuating a transaction in a manner that lower rate of duty is attracted -The goodness or badness of a vendor's title in no way affects the question of stamp duty. The instrument has to be stamped according to its true intent and meaning of the transaction which it represents. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 503 (Allahabad)

 Stamp Act, 1899 - Stamp Act is a taxing statute - It must be construed strictly - If two meanings are possible, the meaning in favour of the subject must be given effect to. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 503 (Allahabad)

 Stamp Act, 1899, S.2(16), Transfer of Property Act, 1882, S.105 - Lease - A conjoint reading of the definition of lease as given under the Transfer of Property Act and under Stamp Act shows that under Stamp Act, lease has been widely defined. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 503 (Allahabad)

 Stamp Act, 1899, S.2(16) - Lease - Word 'Lease' for the purposes of Stamp Act means 'lease' as defined under the Stamp Act. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 503 (Allahabad)

 Stamp Act, 1899, S.47-A, Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision) Act, 1985, S.32 - Public Limited Company - Declared sick - Property was offered for sale in the open market and bids were invited - That being so, there is no question of any intention to defraud the revenue or non disclosure of the correct price - Revenue Officer cannot assess the market value - Registration to be done at the price disclosed in the document of conveyance. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 398 (S.C.)

Succession Act, 1925

 Succession Act, 1925, Ss.372, 384, 388 - Succession certificate - Petition decided by Civil Judge (Senior Division) in exercise of delegated power of District Judge - Appeal against - Lies to District Judge and not to High Court - If the petition is decided by District Judge himself then appeal lies to High Court. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 508 (P&H)

Transfer of Property Act, 1882

 Transfer of Property Act, 1882, S.58(d), Limitation Act, 1963, Art.61 - Usufructuary mortgage - Redemption - Limitation - Starting point when no time limit is fixed - Limitation to redeem usufructuary mortgage does not start to run on the date of mortgage but will arise on the date when the mortgagor pays or tenders to the mortgagee or deposits in Court, the mortgage money or the balance thereof - Held, once a mortgage always a mortgage and is always redeemable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 476 (P&H)

 Transfer of Property Act, 1882, S.58(d), Limitation Act, 1963, Art.61(a) - Usufructuary mortgage - Redemption - Limitation - No time limit fixed for redemption - Property can be redeemed at any time as the right to seek redemption would not arise on the date of mortgage but will arise on the date when the mortgagor pay or tender to the mortgagee or deposits in Court the mortgage money or the balance thereof - Once a mortgage always a mortgage and is always redeemable. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 334 (P&H)

WILL

 Will - Coparcenary/ancestral property - A male Hindu governed by Mitakshara system is not debarred from making a Will in respect of coparcenary/ancestral property. (Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Ss.30, 4). 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 535 (S.C.)

 Will - Cuttings and over writings - Will not registered - Scribe failing to explain as to under what circumstances this over writing happened - Signatures of testator on Will did not tally with other admitted signatures when compared by Court - Held, Will is fabricated after the death of testator. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 408 (P&H)

 Will - Disinheriting a natural heir - By itself not sufficient to discard a Will. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 358 (P&H)

 Will - Disinheriting natural heir - Reason for disinheriting nephew given in will but no reason given to disinherit real sister - Failure of testator to refer to or assigning any reason for disinheriting his only sister is a suspicious circumstance. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 358 (P&H)

 Will - Executed due to love and affection and services rendered - Merely because defendant was minor it could not be said that he was incapable of rendering services to the executant - If Will is proved on record contents thereof would show that it was for consideration of services rendered - Will upheld. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 518 (P&H)

 Will - Execution - Proof - Proof of a Will does not end with the deposition of the attesting witnesses and the scribe - Propounder of a Will is thereafter required to dispel any suspicious circumstances that may surround its execution. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 358 (P&H)

 Will - Execution - Proof - The party who sets up a Will, has to prove the same in accordance with law and to dispel all the suspicious circumstances, if any, surrounding the Will. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 408 (P&H)

 Will - Not registered - Held, failure to register a Will by itself does not lead to rejection of a Will - A Will does not require registration. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 358 (P&H)

 Will - Scribe - Did not sign the Will as an attesting witness - Held, scribe cannot be treated as an attesting witness. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 408 (P&H)

 Will - Suspicious circumstances - Beneficiaries taking active part in preparation of Will - Held, Will is surrounded by suspicious circumstances. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 408 (P&H)

 Will - Suspicious circumstances - Material discrepancy in deposition of scribe and attesting witness as to whether Will was scribed in the presence of attesting witnesses - Held, this is a suspicious circumstance. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 358 (P&H)

 Will - Suspicious circumstances - One attesting witness examined deposed that other attesting witness was Prem son of Chowkidar whereas Will is attested by Chuhar Singh son of Chowkidar - This is not a slip of tounge - An attesting witness would not make such a fundamental error in identifying the other attesting witness. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 358 (P&H)

 Will - Suspicious circumstances - Register produced by scribe containing an entry that Will was executed on 28.10.1973 - Next entry appearing after a gap of six months and last entry is dated 29.05.1975 - Entry in scribes register records one Kartar Singh as an attesting witness followed by "Bakalam Khud" i.e. signed in his own hand - However, neither the register nor the Will bears his signatures - Held, this is a suspicious circumstance. 2009(3) Civil Court Cases 358 (P&H)