Subscribe to the Bombay Chartered Accountant Journal Subscribe Now!

March 2024

Allied Laws

By Dr. K. Shivaram, Senior Advocate, Rahul K. Hakani | Shashi Bekal, Advocates
Reading Time 9 mins

50 Late Kalu Gapliya (Through Legal Heirs) vs. Seeta Nathu and others

AIR 2023 (NOC) 820 (MP)(HC)

Date of Order: 8th August, 2023

Evidence — Land Dispute — Ownership — Adoption Deed between Petitioner and father of Respondents — Thumb impression of Respondents suggesting consent — Denial — Application in Trial court for verification of thumb impression by expert - Rejection of application — Failure to show expert aware of thumb impression of Respondents as mandated — Thumb impression unique — Cannot be forged easily — Rejection of application erroneous. [S. 45, 47, Indian Evidence Act, 1872].

FACTS

The Petitioner and Respondent were involved in a legal dispute over land ownership. The Petitioner claimed that he had absolute ownership in the suit property and as such, the recordings of the Respondent’s name in the land revenue records were illegal. The Petitioner, in the Trial court, relied upon an adoption deed entered between him and the erstwhile owner of the suit property (father of Respondents) in order to prove absolute ownership of the suit property. The Petitioner further claimed that the adoption deed consisted of thumb impressions of the Respondents

Read More
Download PDF

You May Also Like

Direct Listing of Indian Companies On International Exchanges

Interesting Apps