Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

Karnataka High Court Grants Defendants Opportunity to Lead Evidence in Land Partition Suit”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Karnataka High Court, presided over by The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.G. Pandit, has granted defendants in a land partition suit the opportunity to lead their evidence. The court’s decision came in response to an application filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), seeking to reopen the stage for defendants’ evidence.

The suit in question involved a dispute over the partition and separate possession of properties, with the defendants contending issues related to Will and Adoption. The trial court had denied the defendants an opportunity to present their evidence, leading to the legal challenge in the high court.

In its observation, the court highlighted the fundamental principle of justice, stating, “No party or litigant shall go out of the Court under the impression that he has not been provided sufficient opportunity to put forth his case or to defend his case.”

The court further emphasized the importance of ensuring that all parties receive fair opportunities to present their arguments in a legal dispute. The judgment underscored the need for a balanced and equitable legal process.

Consequently, the Karnataka High Court set aside the impugned order dated October 31, 2023, and allowed the application to reopen the stage for defendants’ evidence. The defendants were granted permission to lead their evidence within a stipulated timeframe of 15 days.

This ruling reflects the court’s commitment to upholding the principles of justice and providing all parties in a legal dispute with a fair chance to make their case. It serves as a reminder of the importance of due process and equitable treatment within the legal system.

Date of Decision: November 29, 2023

NINGAMMA VS RI. BASAVARAJU

Latest Legal News