Disputed writings – Court should not avoid recourse to Section 73 of the 1872 Act by holding that the Court is not an expert.
Court should not avoid recourse to Section 73 of the 1872 Act by holding that the Court is not an ...
- 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
Tag: Evidence Act S. 73
Court – Fingerprints – Thumb impressions – Expert – Finding by court – Comparison –
Evidence Act, 1872, Section 45, 73 - Fingerprints - Thumb impressions – Expert – Finding by court – Comparison – ...
Evidence Act S. 73 – Handwriting – Examination – The opinion of a handwriting expert is fallible/liable to error like that of any other witness, and yet, it cannot be brushed aside as useless – Court may then apply its own observation by comparing the signatures, or handwritings for providing a decisive weight or influence to its decision
Evidence Act S. 73 - Handwriting - Examination - The opinion of a handwriting expert is fallible/liable to error like ...
