cpc O. 41 R. 27 – When specific allegations have been made by the plaintiff in respect of document being fraudulent, then the burden shifts upon defendant No.1/propounder of the document to prove the same to be genuine, because it is a settled principle of law that the person, who claims some right on the basis of document, is required to positively prove the same.
- Log In
- Home
- A
- B
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- H
- I
- J
- L
- M
- N
- O
- P
- R
- S
- S
- Sale of Goods Act
- Sarfaesi
- Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992
- Service Matters
- Service of orders on a government servant
- Sexual Offence
- Special Marriage Act, 1954
- Specific Performance
- Specific Relief Act, 1963
- Stamp Act, 1899
- Stamp duty
- Stay
- Suit for declaration / possession
- Succession Act
- Suit for recovery of Money
- T
- V
- W
- Log In
- Home
- A
- B
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- H
- I
- J
- L
- M
- N
- O
- P
- R
- S
- S
- Sale of Goods Act
- Sarfaesi
- Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992
- Service Matters
- Service of orders on a government servant
- Sexual Offence
- Special Marriage Act, 1954
- Specific Performance
- Specific Relief Act, 1963
- Stamp Act, 1899
- Stamp duty
- Stay
- Suit for declaration / possession
- Succession Act
- Suit for recovery of Money
- T
- V
- W
Criminal jurisprudence - A fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a person is believed to be innocent until found guilty - Grant of bail is the general rule and putting a person in jail or in a prison or in a correction home (whichever expression one may wish to use) is an exception - Bail.
Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act S. 6 - It immediately provides that the custody of a minor who has not completed the age of 5 years shall ordinarily be with the mother - A proviso is in the nature of an exception to what has earlier been generally prescribed - The use of the word “ordinarily” cannot be overemphasised. It ordains a presumption, albeit a rebuttable one, in favour of the mother
CPC O. 41 R. 27 – When specific allegations have been made by the plaintiff in respect of document being fraudulent, then the burden shifts upon defendant No.1/propounder of the document to prove the same to be genuine, because it is a settled principle of law that the person, who claims some right on the basis of document, is required to positively prove the same.
in
CPC
0
