Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

Calcutta High Court: Stridhan Recovery and Gifted Money Claims Evaluated

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court, comprising Justices Partha Sarathi Chatterjee and Tapabrata Chakraborty, delivered a meticulous judgment shedding light on the intricacies of stridhan recovery and claims regarding gifted money. The court meticulously examined the evidence and legal aspects surrounding the case, offering valuable insights into the application of legal principles.

The judgment, which delves into the realms of civil law, revolves around a dispute involving the recovery of stridhan articles and money gifted for specific purposes. The Honorable Bench's observations in this case have brought forth important insights into the interpretation of legal provisions and the distinction between civil and criminal proceedings.

In the observations, Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee highlighted the importance of evaluating evidence meticulously, stating, "Witnesses are of three types, namely, wholly reliable, wholly unreliable, and neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. In the first two, conclusions may be arrived at by accepting or rejecting evidence, but in the case of the third, the court has to be circumspect and look for corroboration in material particulars by reliable testimony, direct or circumstantial."

Furthermore, Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty emphasized the need for careful consideration of evidence's consistency, stating, "The evidence of PW-1 is not consistent to the full extent. Her evidence relating to ornaments has not found support in evidence of PW-2, and there is no documentary evidence to corroborate the evidence of PW-1. In cross-examination, her evidence has been shaken to some extent."

The judgment addressed the application of Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as well as the provisions of Sections 3, 91, and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The court explored the concept of constructive res judicata and the impact of evidence in different legal proceedings, drawing on legal precedents to elucidate its conclusions.

Honourable Bench set aside part of the decree and dismissed a cross-objection, allocating costs accordingly. The court provided comprehensive guidelines for decree issuance and the transmission of records.

Date of Decision: 11 August 2023

Sanjay Pareek & Ors. vs Smt. Madhushree Sharma (Pareek)       

Latest Legal News