Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Nagabhushanammal (D) By Lrs. VS C. Chandikeswaralingam...
Checking relevance for Mohammed Abdul Wahid VS Nilofer...
Mohammed Abdul Wahid VS Nilofer - 2023 8 Supreme 487 : In a suit of partition, a party (including the defendant) can appear as a witness in their own cause. The law does not differentiate between a party to a suit and a witness for the purposes of adducing evidence, either documentary or oral. When a defendant appears as a witness, they are on the same footing as any other witness. The provisions of the Civil Procedure Code and the Indian Evidence Act do not exclude a party from being treated as a witness, and the function performed by a party when in the witness box is the same as that of any other witness. Therefore, the defendant can be called as a witness in a partition suit, and their testimony can be subject to examination in chief, cross-examination, and re-examination, just like any other witness.Checking relevance for Thomas Shorunke VS The King. ...
Thomas Shorunke VS The King. - 1946 0 Supreme(SC) 11 : In a suit of partition, a party may apply for a subpoena to compel the attendance of any witness, including one from the defense, as the court has the authority to summon any person within its jurisdiction to give evidence or produce documents. This right is not negated by the court''''s power to issue process on its own motion or at a party''''s request, and a party is entitled to obtain a summons for a witness even before the case is disposed of. The court cannot refuse such an application merely because the witness is from the defense, provided the evidence is relevant and material.Checking relevance for Raja Gounder VS M. Sengodan...
Checking relevance for Mahadeo Lal Khemka VS Dwarika Prasad Khemka...
Checking relevance for Ram Das @ Ram Suraj VS Gandiabai...
Checking relevance for Veerattalingam VS Ramesh...
Checking relevance for M. Sharadamma, W/o Late Sri. Nagaraj M.K. vs Kiran Kumar, S/o Late Sri. Premchand...
M. Sharadamma, W/o Late Sri. Nagaraj M.K. vs Kiran Kumar, S/o Late Sri. Premchand - 2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 72 : In a suit of partition, a party can apply to summon the other party (defendant) as a witness, but this is not an absolute right. The trial court has discretion to allow such summoning based on the necessity and circumstances of the case. There is no prohibition in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against one party to a suit examining the other party as a witness. The Supreme Court in Mohammad Abdul Wahid v. Niloufer & Ors. (2024) 2 SCC 144 has affirmed that a party can require the other party to give evidence, and Rule 21 of Order XVI enables such a request. However, the court must consider the purpose for which the witness is summoned, and the application must be justified by the facts of the case.Checking relevance for Sulochana VS Pitchaimurugan...
Sulochana VS Pitchaimurugan - 2024 0 Supreme(Mad) 951 : In a suit for partition, a party can summon a defending party as a witness only if there is no conflict of interest. The court has held that while Order XVI Rule 21 of the Civil Procedure Code allows summoning of witnesses, it is not a right that can be exercised indiscriminately, especially when there is a conflict of interest. Summoning a contesting party as a witness is generally not permissible because a party cannot be compelled to testify against their own interests. The court must exercise discretion based on the facts of each case. If the defending party is not a real opponent and has no conflicting interest, such summoning may be allowed for very good reasons. However, in cases where the defending party is actively contesting the suit, as in a partition case, summoning them as a witness is not sustainable.Checking relevance for Bhushan Kumar Gupta VS Rajinder Kumar Gupta...
Checking relevance for P. Nanikutty, (Expired) VS K. U. Kalpakadevi...
P. Nanikutty, (Expired) VS K. U. Kalpakadevi - Current Civil Cases (2023) : In a partition suit, a witness from the defense can be examined to establish the execution of a will. The court may examine any attesting witness to the will, including the second attesting witness (DW2), who can testify about the signing of the will by the testator and other witnesses. The law does not require the scribe of the will to be examined, nor does it grant the scribe special status as the best witness. If the scribe is also an attesting witness, he is competent to depose about the execution of the will, but his testimony is on equal footing with other attesting witnesses. The trial court may rely on such evidence to determine the validity of the will and whether the property is partible. In this case, the second attesting witness was examined as DW2, and his testimony was accepted as credible, leading to the conclusion that the will was properly executed and the property was not partible.
