P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court  ||  Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long  ||  Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo  ||  Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision  ||  Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act  ||  Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself  ||  Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession  ||  SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order  ||  NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions    

Kar. HC: Can’t Accept Photostat Copy of Unregistered Sale Agreement as Secondary Evidence - (19 Mar 2024)

LAW OF EVIDENCE

Karnataka High Court has held that for a trial being held under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a photocopy of an unregistered sale agreement cannot be admitted as secondary evidence only on the ground that the accused has admitted his signature in the said document.

Tags : KARNATAKA HIGH COURT   SECTION 138 OF NI ACT   UNREGISTERED SALE AGREEMENT   SECONDARY EVIDENCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved