Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Evidence Act, 1882

5 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

RAJEEV GUPTA & ORS.versusPRASHANT GARG & ORS.

2025 INSC 55223 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiffs, heirs of Dr. Karam Chand, sued the appellants for cancellation of two 1992 sale deeds and recovery of possession of a family house, alleging that the deeds were void because the vendor, Ramesh Chand, had no title and that a will favouring the plaintiffs had been admitted in earlier suits. The trial cour

S.R. SRINAVASA AND ORS.versusS. PADMAVATHAMMA

2010 INSC 23622 April 2010Disposed off

The suit concerned a schedule property inherited by the mother (P) after her husband's death. After P's death, her daughter I possessed the property, but upon I's death, Defendant No.1 (a relative of P) took possession and claimed ownership based on a Will dated 18‑June‑1974 allegedly executed by P in favour of I. The

PAWAN KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2001 INSC 14213 March 2001Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the conviction of Pawan Kumar and co‑accused for abetment of suicide, dowry harassment and related offences under Sections 306, 498A, 201 and 193 of the IPC. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence and a statutory presumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act, while the defence

GURUNATH MANOHAR PAVASKAR & ORSversusNAGESH SIDDAPPA NAVALGUND & ORS.

2007 INSC 126311 December 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Gurunath Manohar Pavaskar and others sued Nagesh Siddappa Navalgund and others for permanent and mandatory injunction, alleging that the defendants had encroached upon land they claimed to own by deed of sale dated 7‑Nov‑1984. The trial court decreed the suit, and the Karnataka High Court upheld the decree, holding tha

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search