Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
ROBIN PHUKAN
Harekrishna Raha S/o Late Sudhannya Mohan Raha – Appellant
Versus
Pratibha Sundari Paul W/o Late Madhusudan Paul – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background facts of the case and appeal (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. status and claims regarding the land ownership (Para 6 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. arguments on evidence and trial court's findings (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. court's analysis on evidence and presumption (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. importance of burden of proof in legal proceedings (Para 17) |
| 6. court's reasoning on the valid transfer of land (Para 18 , 19) |
| 7. final resolution and implications of the case (Para 20 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
1. Heard Mr. I.H. Laskar, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. M.J. Quadir, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. In this appeal, under Section 100 of the CPC, the appellants have put to challenge the correctness or otherwise of the judgment and decree, dated 23.12.2013, passed by the learned Civil Judge No.1, Cachar, Silchara (First Appellate Court hereinafter), in Title Appeal No. 34/2009.
3. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and decree, dated 23.12.2013, the learned first appellate Court had allowed the Title Appeal No. 34/2009 and thereby reversed the judgment and decree, dated 19.06.2009, passed by the learned Munsiff No.1, Cachar, Silchar (Trial Court her
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
