Supreme Court: Expecting a Minor to Respond to a Public Court Notice is ‘Perverse’  ||  SC: Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Applies to S. 11 Arbitration Act, Barring Fresh Arbiration After Abandonment  ||  SC: Later Sanction Requirement Won’t Invalidate Cognizance Taken When No Prior Bar Existed  ||  SC: Documents Not Admitted by an Employee in an Enquiry Must be Proved Through Witnesses  ||  Delhi HC: MHA Has Authority to Initiate Disciplinary Proceedings Against AGMUT IAS Officers  ||  MP HC: Financial Hardship or Mere Allegations of Lawyer’s Negligence Cannot Excuse Delayed Appeal  ||  Patna HC: Blanket Approach of Denying Public Employment to Individuals Named in an FIR is Unfair  ||  Kerala HC: Repeated Possession of Even Small Quantities of Narcotic Drugs Can Invoke KAAPA  ||  Calcutta HC: Employers May Deduct Penal Rent From Gratuity of Employees Refusing to Vacate Quarters  ||  Calcutta High Court: ECI Not Singling Out Bengal, More Transfers in Other Poll-Bound States    

Ker HC: Onus to Bring Statement Within Ambit of Sec. 32(1) of IEA is on Party Who Wishes to Avail it - (31 May 2024)

LAW OF EVIDENCE

Ker HC has observed that provisions of Section 32(1) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are in nature of an exception and onus of establishing the circumstances that would bring a statement within any of the exceptions contemplated by Section 32 lies clearly upon party wishing to avail the said statement.

Tags : KERALA HIGH COURT   INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT   EXCEPTIONS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved