Indian Constitution

  Section 122 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 122 Evidence Act 1872 :Communications during marriage -- No person who is or has been married shall be compelled to disclose any communication made to him during marriage by any communication, unless the person who made it, or his representative in interest, consents, except in suits between married persons, or proceedings in which one married person is prosecuted for any crime committed against the other. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 122 Indian Evidence Act 1872: M.C. Verghese vs T.J. Ponnan & Anr on 13 November, 1968 Shankar vs State Of T.N on 4 April, 1994 Shankar @ Gauri Shankar And Ors. vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 April, 1994 Md.Ajmal Md.Amir Kasab @Abu vs State Of Maharashtra on 29 August, 2012 Ram Bharosey vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 25 February, 1954 Khatri & Ors. Etc vs State Of Bihar & Ors on 10 March, 1981 Google India Private Ltd vs M/S. V...

  Section 121 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 121 Evidence Act 1872 :Judges and Magistrates -- No Judge or Magistrate shall, except upon the special order to some Court to which he is subordinate, be compelled to answer any questions as to his own conduct in Court as such Judge or Magistrate, or as to anything which came to his knowledge in Court as such Judge or Magistrate; but he may be examined as to other matters which occurred in his presence whilst he was so acting. Illustrations (a) A, on his trial before the Court of Session, says that a deposition was improperly taken by B, the Magistrate. B cannot be compelled to answer questions as to this, except upon the special order of a superior Court. (b) A is accused before the Court of Session of having given false evidence before B, a Magistrate. B cannot be asked what A said, except upon the special order of the Superior Court. (c) A is accused before the Court of Session of attempting to murder a po...

Section 120 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 120 Evidence Act 1872 :Parties to civil suit, and their wives or husbands. Husband or wife of person under criminal trial -- In all civil proceedings the parties to the suit, and the husband or wife of any party to the suit, shall be competent witnesses. In criminal proceedings against any person, the husband or wife of such person, respectively, shall be a competent witness. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 120 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Raja @ Ayyappan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 1 April, 2020 Harihar Prasad Singh And Another vs Must. Of Munshi Nath Prasadand on 16 January, 1956 Central Bureau Of Investigation vs V.C. Shukla & Ors on 2 March, 1998 State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Cheemalapati Ganeswara Rao & Anr on 23 April, 1963 Raju @ Devendra Choubey vs State Of Chhatisgarh on 21 August, 2014 R.Dineshkumar@Deena vs State Rep. By Inspector Of Police on 16 March, 2015 Azha...

  Section 119 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 119 Evidence Act 1872 :Witness unable to communicate verbally -- A witness who is unable to speak may give his evidence in any other manner in which he can make it intelligible, as by writing or by signs; but such writing must be written and the signs made in open Court, evidence so given shall be deemed to be oral evidence : Provided that if the witness is unable to communicate verbally, the Court shall take the assistance of an interpreter or a special educator in recording the statement, and such statement shall be video graphed. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 119 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Tahsildar Singh And Another vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 5 May, 1959 State Of Rajasthan vs Darshan Singh @ Darshan Lal on 21 May, 2012 Laxminarayan And Another vs Returning Officer And Others on 28 September, 1973 The State Of Bombay vs Kathi Kalu Oghad And Others on 4 Augu...

  Section 118 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 118 Evidence Act 1872 :Who may testify -- All persons shall be competent to testify unless the Court considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions put to them, or from giving rational answers to those questions, by tender years, extreme old age, disease, whether of body or mind, or any other cause of the same kind. Explanation -- A lunatic is not incompetent to testify unless he is prevented by his lunacy from understanding the questions put to him and giving rational answers to them. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 118 Indian Evidence Act 1872: भारतीय साक्ष्य अधिनियम, 1872 की धारा 118 का विवरण :  -  कौन साक्ष्य दे सकेगा -- सभी व्यक्ति साक्ष्य देने के लिए सक्षम होंगे जब तक कि न्यायालय का यह विचार न हो कि कोमल वयस, अतिवार्धक्य, शरीर के या मन के रोग या इसी प्रकार के किसी अन्य कारण से वे उनसे किए गए प्रश्नों को समझने से या उ...

  Section 117 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 117 Evidence Act 1872 :Estoppel of acceptor of bill of exchange, bailee or licensee -- No acceptor of a bill of exchange shall be permitted to deny that the drawer had authority to draw such bill or to endorse it; nor shall any bailee or licensee be permitted to deny that his bailor or licensor had, at the time when the bailment or licence commenced, authority to make such bailment or grant such licence. Explanation 1-- The acceptor of a bill of exchange may deny that the bill was really drawn by the person by whom it purports to have been drawn. Explanation 2-- If a bailee delivers the goods bailed to a person other than the bailor, he may prove that such person had a right to them as against the bailor. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 117 Indian Evidence Act 1872: State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Cheemalapati Ganeswara Rao & Anr on 23 April, 1963 State Of Maharashtra...

  Section 116 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 116 Evidence Act 1872 :Estoppel of tenant; and of licensee of person in possession -- No tenant of immovable property or person claiming through such tenant, shall, during the continuance of the tenancy, be permitted to deny that the landlord of such tenant had, at the beginning of the tenancy, a title to such immovable property; and no person who came upon any immovable property by the licence of the person in possession thereof, shall be permitted to deny that such person had a title to such possession at the time when such license was given. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 116 Indian Evidence Act 1872: D. Satyanarayana vs P. Jagadish on 15 September, 1987 S. Thangappan vs P. Padmavathy on 24 August, 1999 Sri S.K. Sarma vs Mahesh Kumar Verma on 17 September, 2002 Bansraj Laltaprasad Mishra vs Stanley Parker Jones on 16 February, 2006 Gangai Vinayagar Temple & A...

  Section 115 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 115 Evidence Act 1872 :Estoppel -- When one person has, by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representative, to deny the truth of that thing. Illustration A intentionally and falsely leads B to believe that certain land belongs to A, and thereby induces B to buy and pay for it. The land afterwards becomes the property of A, and A seeks to set aside the sale on the ground that, at the time of the sale, he had no title. He must not be allowed to prove his want of title. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 115 Indian Evidence Act 1872: भारतीय साक्ष्य अधिनियम, 1872 की धारा 115 का विवरण :  -   विबंध -- जबकि एक व्यक्ति ने अपनी घोषणा, कार्य य...

  Section 114A Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 114A Evidence Act 1872 :Presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecution for rape -- In a prosecution for rape under clause (a), clause (b), clause (c), clause (d), clause (e), clause (f), clause (g), clause (h), clause (i), clause (j), clause (k), clause (1), clause (m) or clause (n) of sub-section (2) of section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), where sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and the question is whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have been raped and such woman states in her evidence before the court that she did not consent, the court shall presume that she did not consent. Presumption as to offences committed under section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 509, section 509A or section 509B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 -- When the question is whether a person has committed an offence under section 354, secti...

  Section 114 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 114 Evidence Act 1872 :Court may presume existence of certain facts -- The Court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case. Illustrations The Court may presume :- (a) That a man who is in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is either the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he can account for his possession. (b) That an accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborated in material particulars; (c) That a bill of exchange, accepted or endorsed, was accepted or endorsed for good consideration. (d) That a thing or state of things which has been shown to be in existence within a period shorter than that within which such things or state of things usually cease to exist, i...

  Section 113B Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 113B Evidence Act 1872 :Presumption as to dowry death -- When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death. Explanation -- For the purposes of this section, “dowry death” shall have the same meaning as in section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 113B Indian Evidence Act 1872: Sultan Singh vs State Of Haryana on 26 September, 2014 Hira Lal And Ors vs State (Govt. Of Nct) Delhi on 25 July, 2003 Hira Lal And Ors vs State (Govt. Of Nct) Delhi on 25 July, 2003 Kaliyaperumal And Anr vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 27 August, 2003 Baljeet Singh & Anr vs State Of Haryana on 24 ...

  Section 113A Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 113A Evidence Act 1872 :Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married women -- When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the Court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband. Explanation -- For the purposes of this section, "cruelty” shall have the same meaning as in section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 113-A Indian Evidence Act 1872: Hans Raj vs State Of Haryana on 26 February, 2004 Thanu Ram vs State Of M.P on 5 October, 2010 Ma...

  Section 113 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 113 Evidence Act 1872 :Proof of cession of territory -- A notification in the Official Gazette that any portion of British territory has before the commencement of Part III of the Government of India, Act, 1935 (26 Geo. 5, c. 2), been ceded to any Native State, Prince or Ruler, shall be conclusive proof that a valid cession of such territory took place at the date mentioned in such notification. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 113 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Gurjit Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 26 November, 2019 Satbir Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 28 May, 2021 Pawan Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 13 March, 2001 K. Prema S. Rao And Anr vs Yadla Srinivasa Rao And Ors on 25 October, 2002 Rajendran And Anr vs State Asstt.Commnr.Of Police Law  on 2 December, 2008 Maganbhai Ishwarbhai Patel vs Union Of India And Anr on 9 January, 1969 Gopal vs State Of Rajasthan on ...

Section 112 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 112 Evidence Act 1872 :Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy -- The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when he could have been begotten. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 112 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Shyam Lal @ Kuldeep vs Sanjeev Kumar & Ors on 15 April, 2009 Dipanwita Roy vs Ronobroto Roy on 15 October, 2014 Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik vs Lata Nandlal Badwaik & Anr on 6 January, 2014 Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik vs Lata Nandlal Badwaik & Anr on 6 January, 1947 Goutam Kundu vs State Of West Bengal And Anr on 14 May, 1993 Shri Banarsi...

  Section 111A Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 111A Evidence Act 1872 :Presumption as to certain offences -- (1) Where a person is accused of having committed any offence specified in sub-section (2), in- (a) any area declared to be a disturbed area under any enactment, for the time being in force, making provision for the suppression of disorder and restoration and maintenance of public order; or (b) any area in which there has been, over a period of more than one month, extensive, disturbance of the public peace, and it is shown that such person had been at a place in such area at a time when fire-arms or explosives were used at or from that place to attack or resist the members of any armed forces or the forces charged with the maintenance of public order acting in the discharge of their duties, it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is shown, that such person had committed such offence. (2) The offences referred to in sub-section (1) are the follo...

  Section 111 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 111 Evidence Act 1872 :Proof of good faith in transactions where one party is in relation of active confidence – Where there is a question as to the good faith of a transaction between parties, one of whom stands to the other in a position of active confidence, the burden of proving the good faith of the transaction is on the party who is in a position of active confidence. Illustrations (a) The good faith of a sale by a client to an attorney is in question in a suit brought by the client. The burden of proving the good faith of the transaction is on the attorney. (b) The good faith of a sale by a son just come of age to a father is in question in a suit brought by the son. The burden of proving the good faith of the transaction is on the father. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 111 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Sangramsinh P. Gaekwad & Ors vs Shantadevi P. Gaekwad on...

  Section 110 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 110 Evidence Act 1872 :Burden of proof as to ownership -- When the question is whether any person is owner of anything of which he is shown to be in possession, the burden of proving that he is not the owner is on the person who affirms that he is not the owner. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 110 Indian Evidence Act 1872: M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs vs Mahant Suresh Das & Ors on 9 November, 2019 Chuharmal S/O Takarmal Mohnani vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, on 2 May, 1988 State Of A.P. & Ors vs M/S. Star Bone Mill & Fertiliser Co on 21 February, 2013 Nair Service Society Ltd vs Rev. Father K. C. Alexander & Ors on 12 February, 1968 State Of Maharashtra vs Chandraprakash Kewal Chand Jain on 18 January, 1990 Chief Conservator Of Forests vs Collectors And Ors on 18 February, 2003 Standard Chartered Bank vs Andhra Bank Financial Services on 5 May, 2006 State Of ...

  Section 109 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 109 Evidence Act 1872 :Burden of proof as to relationship in the cases of partners, landlord and tenant, principal and agent -- When the question is whether persons are partners, landlord and tenant, or principal and agent, and it has been shown that they have been acting as such, the burden of proving that they do not stand, or have ceased to stand, to each other in those relationships respectively, is on the person who affirms it. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 109 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Somasundaram @ Somu vs State Rep.By Dy.Comm.Of Police on 28 September, 2016 Somasundaram @ Somu vs The State Rep. By The Deputy on 3 June, 2020 Shri Partap Singh (Since Dead) Thr vs Shiv Ram (Since Dead) Thr Lrs. on 20 February, 2020 Arjun Singh vs State Of H.P on 6 February, 2009 State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Cheemalapati Ganeswara Rao & Anr on 23 April, 1963 Sardar Sardul Si...

  Section 108 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 108 Evidence Act 1872 :Burden of proving that person is alive who has not been heard of for seven years -- Provided that when the question is whether a man is alive or dead, and it is proved that he has not been heard of for seven years by those who would naturally have heard of him if he had been alive, the burden of proving that he is alive is shifted to the person who affirms it. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 108 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Gurdit Singh And Ors. Etc vs Munsha Singh And Ors. Etc on 29 November, 1976 K.I. Pavunny vs Assistant Collector (Head on 3 February, 1997 L.I.C. Of India vs Anuradha on 26 March, 2004 Percy Rustam Basta vs State Of Maharashtra on 16 March, 1971 Saroop Singh vs Banto & Ors on 7 October, 2005 Saroop Singh vs Banto & Ors on 7 October, 2005 N. Jayalakshmi Ammal vs R. Gopala Pathar on 9 September, 1994 Oriental Insurance Com...

  Section 107 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 107 Evidence Act 1872 :Burden of proving death of person known to have been alive within thirty years -- When the question is whether a man is alive or dead, and it is shown that he was alive within thirty years, the burden of proving that he is dead is on the person who affirms it. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 107 Indian Evidence Act 1872: L.I.C. Of India vs Anuradha on 26 March, 2004 Illias vs Collector Of Customs, Madras on 31 October, 1968 Somasundaram @ Somu vs The State Rep. By The Deputy on 3 June, 2020 Gurdit Singh And Ors. Etc vs Munsha Singh And Ors. Etc on 29 November, 1976 Somasundaram @ Somu vs State Rep.By Dy.Comm.Of Police on 28 September, 2016 State Of Punjab vs Iqbal Singh And Ors on 10 May, 1991 A. S. Krishna vs State Of, Madras.(With Connected on 28 November, 1956 Kehar Singh & Ors vs State (Delhi Admn.) on 3 August, 1988 Kartar Singh vs State Of ...

  Section 106 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 106 Evidence Act 1872 : Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge -- When any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him. Illustrations (a) When a person does an act with some intention other than that which the character and circumstances of the act suggest, the burden of proving that intention is upon him. (b) A is charged with traveling on a railway without a ticket. The burden of proving that he had a ticket is on him. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 106 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Shah Gumman Mal vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 6 February, 1980 Narayan Govind Gavate Etc vs State Of Maharashtra on 11 October, 1976 Arvind Singh vs The State Of Maharashtra on 24 April, 2020 Shambu Nath Mehra vs The State Of Ajmer on 12 March, 1956 State Of Rajasthan vs Kashi Ram on 7 November, 2006 State Of Rajasthan vs Tha...

 Section 105 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 105 Evidence Act 1872 :Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions -- When a person is accused of any offence, the burden of proving the existence of circumstances bringing the case within any of the General Exceptions in the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), or within any special exception or proviso contained in any other part of the same Code, or in any law defining the offence, is upon him, and the Court shall presume the absence of such circumstances. Illustrations (a) A, accused of murder, alleges that, by reason of unsoundness of mind, he did not know the nature of the act. The burden of proof is on A. (b) A, accused of murder, alleges that, by grave and sudden provocation, he was deprived of the power of self-control. The burden of proof is on A. (c) Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code provides that whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt, s...

  Section 104 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 104 Evidence Act 1872 :Burden of proving fact to be proved to make evidence admissible -- The burden of proving any fact necessary to be proved in order to enable any person to give evidence of any other fact is on the person who wishes to give such evidence. Illustrations (a) A wishes to prove a dying declaration by B. A must prove B's death. (b) A wishes to prove, by secondary evidence, the contents of a lost document. A must prove that the document has been lost. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 104 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Illias vs Collector Of Customs, Madras on 31 October, 1968 Romesh Chandra Mehta vs State Of West Bengal on 18 October, 1968 Bharat Barrel And Drum vs Amin Chand Payrelal on 18 February, 1999 Bishna @ Bhiswadeb Mahato & Ors vs State Of West Bengal on 28 October, 2005 भारतीय साक्ष्य अधिनियम, 1872 की धारा 104 का विवरण :  -  साक्ष्य को ग्रा...

  Section 103 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 103 Evidence Act 1872 :Burden of proof as to particular fact -- The burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on that person who wishes the Court to believe in its existence, unless it is provided by any law that the proof of that fact shall lie on any particular person. Illustrations (a) A prosecutes B for theft, and wishes the Court to believe that B admitted the theft to C. A must prove the admission. (b) B wishes the Court to believe that, at the time in question, he was elsewhere. He must prove it.   Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 103 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Sawal Das vs State Of Bihar on 9 January, 1974 Narayan Govind Gavate Etc vs State Of Maharashtra on 11 October, 1976 Varada Bhavanarayana Rao vs State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors on 25 March, 1963 State Of Haryana vs Sher Singh & Ors on 24 February, 1981 Behram Khurshed Pesikaka vs The State Of Bo...

  Section 102 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 102 Evidence Act 1872 :On whom burden of proof lies -- The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side. Illustrations (a) A sues B for land of which B is in possession, and which, as A asserts, was left to A by the Will of C, B's father. If no evidence were given on either side, B would be entitled to retain his possession. Therefore, the burden of proof is on A. (b) A sues B for money due: on a bond. The execution of the bond is admitted, but B says that it was obtained by fraud, which A denies. If no evidence were given on either side, A would succeed, as the bond is not disputed and the fraud is not proved. Therefore, the burden of proof is on B. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 102 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Narayan Govind Gavate Etc vs State Of Maharashtra on 11 October, 1976 Vijayee Singh An...

  Section 101 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 101 Evidence Act 1872 :Burden of proof -- Whoever desires any Court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts exist. When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said that the burden of proof lies on that person. Illustrations (a) A desires a Court to give judgment that B shall be punished for a crime which A says B has committed. A must prove that B has committed the crime. (b) A desires a Court to give judgment that he is entitled to certain land in the possession of B, by reason of facts which he asserts, and which B denies, to be true. A must prove the existence of those facts. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 101 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Narayan Govind Gavate Etc vs State Of Maharashtra on 11 October, 1976 S.P. Gupta vs President Of India And Ors. on 30 Dece...

  Section 100 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 100 Evidence Act 1872 :Saving of provisions of Indian Succession Act relating to Wills -- Nothing in this Chapter contained shall be taken to affect any of the provisions of the Indian Succession Act (10 of 1865) as to the construction of Wills. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 100 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Raghbir Singh Gill vs Gurcharan Singh Tohra & Ors on 9 May, 1980 Sekar @ Raja Sekharan vs State Rep. By Inspector Of Police, on 3 October, 2002 Ananta Deb Singha Mahapatra & Ors vs State Of West Bengal on 6 June, 2007 Rizan & Another vs State Of Chhatisgarh Thru Chief on 21 January, 2003 Laxman Singh vs Poonam Singh & Ors on 10 September, 2003 State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Ramesh on 18 November, 2004 James Martin vs State Of Kerala on 16 December, 2003 V. Subramani And Anr vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 3 March, 2005 Shahjajhan And Ors vs State Of Kerala And Anr ...

  Section 99 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 99 Evidence Act 1872 :Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document -- Persons who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest, may give evidence of any facts tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document. Illustration A and B make a contract in writing that B shall sell A certain cotton, to be paid for on delivery. At the same time they make an oral agreement that three months' credit shall be given to A. This could not be shown as between A and B, but it might be shown by C, if it affected his interests. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 99 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Bai Hira Devi And Others vs The Official Assignee Of Bombay on 20 February, 1958 Ranveer Singh vs State Of M.P on 21 January, 2009 Raghbir Singh & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 12 November, 2008 Dinesh Singh vs State Of U.P on 4 August, 2008...

 Section 98 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 98 Evidence Act 1872 : Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc. -- Evidence may be given to show the meaning of illegible or not commonly intelligible characters, of foreign, obsolete, technical, local and provincial expressions, of abbreviations and of words used in a peculiar sense. Illustration A, a sculptor, agrees to sell to B, “all my mods”. A has both models and modelling tools. Evidence may be given to show which he meant to sell. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 98 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Laxminarayan And Another vs Returning Officer And Others on 28 September, 1973 Raghbir Singh & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 12 November, 2008 Dinesh Singh vs State Of U.P on 4 August, 2008 Sekar @ Raja Sekharan vs State Rep. By Inspector Of Police, on 3 October, 2002 Arun vs State Of Maharashtra on 16 March, 2009 Ananta Deb Singha Mahapatra & Ors vs State Of West...

  Section 97 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English Section 97 Evidence Act 1872 : Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the whole correctly applies -- When the language used applies partly to one set of existing facts, and partly to another set of existing facts, but the whole of it does not apply correctly to either, evidence may be given to show to which of the two it was meant to apply. Illustration A agrees to sell to B “my land at X in the occupation of Y”. A has land at X, but not in the occupation of Y, and he has land in the occupation of Y, but it is not at X. Evidence may be given of facts showing which he meant to sell. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 97 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Arikala Narasa Reddy vs Venkataram Reddy Reddygari & Anr on 4 February, 2014 Arikala Narasa Reddy vs Venkataram Reddy Reddygari & Anr on 4 February, 1947 Arun vs State Of Maharashtra on 1...

 Section 96 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 96 Evidence Act 1872 :Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of several persons -- When the facts are such that the language used might have been meant to apply to anyone, and could not have been meant to apply to more than one, of several persons or things, evidence may be given of facts which show which of those persons or things it was intended to apply to. Illustrations (a) A agrees to sell to B, for Rs. 1,000 “my white horse”. A has two white horses. Evidence may be given of facts which show which of them was meant. (b) A agrees to accompany B to Haidarabad. Evidence may be given of facts showing whether Haidarabad in the Dekkhan or Haidarabad in Sindh was meant. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 96 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Shyamlal Mohanlal vs State Of Gujarat on 14 December, 1964 M.P. Sharma And Ors. vs Satish Chandra, District on 15 M...

  Section 95 Indian Evidence Act 1872 in Hindi and English  Section 95 Evidence Act 1872 :Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts - When language used in a document is plain in itself, but is unmeaning in reference to existing facts, evidence may be given to show that it was used in a peculiar sense. Illustration A sells to B, by deed, “my house in Calcutta”. A had no house in Calcutta, but it appears that he had a house at Howrah, of which B had been in possession since the execution of the deed. These facts may be proved to show that the deed related to the house at Howrah. Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Case Law Related to Section 95 Indian Evidence Act 1872: Raghbir Singh Gill vs Gurcharan Singh Tohra & Ors on 9 May, 1980 Anglo American Metallurgical vs Mmtc Ltd. on 17 December, 2020 Raja Ram Jaiswal vs State Of Bihar on 4 April, 1963 Mangala Waman Karandikar(D) vs Prakash Damodaar Ranade on 7 May, 2021 M. P. Sharma And Others v...