Plaintiff Must Prove Own Case in Civil Suits

2024 0 Supreme(All) 1585

In exercise of power under the said provisions, this court is required to consider the case set up by the prosecution/ complainant for coming to the conclusion as to whether the criminal proceedings are required to be quashed at the initial stage. ... The accused person during trial is required to place and prove/ establish its defence in accordance with the law of evidence. The defence of the accused is required to be taken note of in the trial by the trial Court. At this stage, a min....

In these circumstances, I consider that the amount of evidence required to prove that the plaintiff was innocent would be greater than in a case of malicious prosecution, in which case the acquittal or discharge, which was the result of that prosecution, could be relied on. ... Malicious prosecution-Actio de injuria-Burden of proof that the plaintiff was innocent-Nature of evidence required to prove innocence. On a complaint made by the defendant against the plaintiff the Ma....

- In this case the only issue is whether deed No. 41,375 was executed by one Dingiria. ... I do not think that the Commissioner of Requests ought to have been satisfied with the evidence produced in this case. ... Evidence Ordinance, s. 68-Proof of document required by law to be attested-Witnesses to document not to be found-Evidence to satisfy the Court that such witness is not to be found. ... The learned Commissioner of Requests, after hearing all the evidence available, decided that, on the materials before him, there was just s....

2023 0 Supreme(Raj) 270

From discussion above, it can succinctly be ruled that in a claim case under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the claimant is required to prove the motor vehicle accident due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. ... Production of eye-witness to prove the aforesaid fact is not a sine qua non. Other available evidences oral or documentary may be relied upon to prove motor vehicle accident due to negligence of the driver. Nature of such evidence would depend upon the facts of indiv....

1965 Supreme(Online)(All) 9

Without his making the allegation the appellant was not required to prove the income - tax paid by him by producing the chalans and receipts. This rule confirms that it was for the respondent to notice the proviso and to make the necessary allegation. ... After requiring the appellant to allege the facts it should have called upon, as required by O. 10, R. 1, the respondent to admit or deny them. ... But having shown that they fell within to general definition of that word they would be entitled to relief unless they were deprived of the ....

All that is required is that there should be evidence which may establish a case, but the evidence is weighed only at the conclusion of the trial. ... So far as they go they agree in saying that an accused need not prove his case-even when based on an exception-beyond a reasonable doubt, which carries with it the implication that it will be sufficient for him to prove his case up to a reasonable doubt. ... Or, in other words, the standard required by the additio....

2023 0 Supreme(Guj) 1243

Thus, these are the documents, which are necessary to prove the case of the petitioner and for that purpose the witnesses prayed for are required to be examined. ... The submission made by the learned advocate for the petitioner that the stage of further leading the evidence of the petitioner is yet not closed so the petitioner has an ample opportunity to prove his case before the learned trial court. ... Learned advocate for the respondents while objecting to the petition submitted that, the documents ....

2024 Supreme(SRI)(SC) 12788

In the instant case, the plaintiff has led sufficient evidence to prove its case at the ex parte trial. ... The more serious the allegation the higher the degree of probability that is required: but it need not, in a civil case, reach the very high standard required by the criminal law. ... In this case, wife sought for divorce on the ground of cruelty. The Court of Appeal held that it was not a misdirection for the trial judge to have stated that the petitioner must....

2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 6599

Also, the application for bringing the evidence of the attesting witness on record does not disclose the ingredients of Order XVIII Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which is required to be read in the context of the previously existing Order XVIII Rule 17A of the Code which mandated the parties ... The learned Trial Judge was justified in observing that the contents of a document can only be proved by its executants, who have not come forward to prove the same. 9. ... However, it is submitted that since the attesting witness can collaterally #HL_STA....

2024 0 Supreme(Del) 741

Section 106 of the Evidence Act does not relieve the prosecution to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt. ... Even where there are facts especially within the knowledge of the accused, which could throw a light upon his guilt or innocence, as the case may be, the accused is not bound to allege them or to prove them. ... He submits that the petitioner is in custody w.e.f. 05.12.2021 and has spent almost 02 years, 04 months in custody and since the investigation is complete and the trial is underway, the custody of t....

2019 0 Supreme(Raj) 2695

The petitioner wants to prove payment by way of summoning plaintiff's passbook and diary which is not only impermissible but also inconceivable in the eye of law. If the petitioner has made payment of a sum of Rs.20,52,000/-, the onus lies upon him to prove such fact. As far as, the counter claim filed by the petitioner is concerned, the petitioner is required to prove his own case.

2017 0 Supreme(MP) 761

9. Applicant-plaintiff is required to prove his own case and cannot stand on the weaknesses of the respondents. Presuming that the respondents refuse to give any evidence, then also the applicant-plaintiff will have to prove his own case and, therefore, on this ground also the applicant-plaintiff is required to enter into the witness-box and prove his case.

2014 0 Supreme(Mad) 4042

Each party has to prove his own case or leads his own defence. It is not a case where the Court has felt handicapped and needs any elucidation. As observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid two judgments of K.K.Velusamy vs. N.Palanisamy and M/s.Bagai Construction Thr. Its Proprietor vs. Gupta Building, Material Store, supra, the objective cannot be to fill in the lacunae and gaps in the evidence, by this exercise. We, however, fail to appreciate the plea of parity on this account, i.e., because the first respondent/ plaintiff was permitted to further cross-exami....

2013 0 Supreme(Raj) 228

The plaintiff is required to prove his case by his own evidence as also by evidence of other witnesses and the documentary proof. If he withhold the best evidence, the court is entitled to draw an adverse inference against him that had he produced such evidence, it would have gone against him. The failure of the plaintiff or the defendant to appear in witness box in certain situations entitles the Court to draw adverse inference against him.

2011 0 Supreme(All) 3129

She was required to produce appropriate evidence to prove her own case. She was before the consolidation Court as a plaintiff.