IndianLawLive
How to Subscribe Free
- Go to bottom of this page.
- Write Your Email Address in the column and Click the button “Subscribe”.
How to add ‘IndianLawLive‘ to Home Screen of Your Mobile Phone?
- 1. Click on the three DOTS (…) on the Right-Side Top of this Page.
- 2. Click “Add to Home Screen”.
How to Find an Article in ‘IndianLawLive’?
- In Google-Search, give (i) the “required word” or “phrase” and also (ii) “Koduvath” – in Quotation marks ( “………” “Koduvath” ).
- Contact: (+) 9400230025
Jaspal Singh v. Ashwani Kumar: Earnest Money Refund Clause Does Not Bar Specific Performance unless it is a Substitute for Sale
Contents in a Nutshell Jaspal Singh v. Ashwani Kumar, 2026 INSC 700 The Supreme Court, in Jaspal Singh v. Ashwani Kumar, 2026 INSC 700 (Justice K.V. Viswanathan and Justice Alok Aradhe), held that existence of a clause for refund of earnest money does not, by itself, bar specific performance, unless the contract clearly shows an…
Venkatesha v. KM Venkatamuniyappa: A Rectification Deed Cannot, in the Guise of Correcting an Error, Substitute the Very Subject Matter
Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam. Findings of the Apex Court in a Nutshell The Supreme Court (Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi) held in Venkatesha v. K.M. Venkatamuniyappa, 2026 INSC 705, held the following: Fact-Summary of the Case Legal Principles Applied by the Apex Court 1. Rectification Deed: Intention must be to correct a…
“Notwithstanding Anything Contained in this Adhiniyam” in Section 63(1) of the BSA—Do Indian Courts Fail to Properly Read and Interpret this Non Obstante Clause?
A Debate. PART I Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam. (The View of the Supreme Court of India) Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, (2020) 7 SCC 1: AIR 2020 SC 4908, holds the field on Law on Electronic Evidence. It was rendered on a reference to a three-Judge Bench History of Reference The history of reference…
Law on Electronic Evidence In India under S. 61 – 63 of the BSA
Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam. Contents in a Nutshell•• • 1. Sec. 63 BSA: Status of Copy (computer output) is raised to Original•• • 2. Thereby, the admissibility of such a copy is not subject to S. 58 (recognised forms of secondary evidence) & S. 60 (when secondary evidence is admissible). •• • 3. S. 63…
A Defective Legislative Piece as regards Documents “Admitted in Writing” in the (Old) Evidence Act is Corrected in S. 58 of the BSA
Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam. Abstract The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, removes the anomaly that existed under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. By expressly recognising “written admissions” as a distinct category of secondary evidence in Section 58, it makes the written admission referred to in Section 60(b) itself (e.g., “copy enclosed”) admissible as secondary evidence. Accordingly, where…
Can Transfer of Registry or Mutation and Payment of Tax be Denied, pointing out Revenue Recovery, Attachment or Bank Loan?
Jojy George Koduvath. Abstract Can Transfer of Registry or Mutation (and Payment of Tax) be Denied, pointing out Revenue Recovery, Attachment or Bank Loan?No, is the answer. Reasons # Mutation is only for fiscal (tax) purposes alone.# It is done not after a title enquiry.# Only a summary enquiry is made. # It is the duty of the Tahsildar to…
Can a Trust be Registered as a Society? Can a Society be Converted into a Trust?
Jojy George Koduvath Abstract A Trust cannot be registered as a Society; why?Both are different legal conceptions.A trust is an obligation, in law. A society is a collection of members.The fundamental principles upon which a trust is founded cannot be varied. A Society cannot be converted into a Trust; why?Because, the fundamental rules of a society…
Documents Produced With the Plaint are Treated As ‘Part of The Plaint’
Jojy George Koduvath Order 7 Rule 14 CPC Deals with the production of documents Order 7 Rule 14 CPC reads as under: Documents Produced With the Plaint are Treated As ‘Part of The Plaint’ When deciding an application under Order VII, Rule 11 (i.e., for rejection of the plaint) the Supreme Court observed in Dahiben…
Makardhwaj Ram v. Jagdish Rai, Valuable Decision of the Supreme Court on Constructive Res Judicata
Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam In Makardhwaj Ram v. Jagdish Rai, 2026 INSC 636, Supreme Court of India (Sanjay Karol, N. Kotiswar Singh, JJ.) rendered a valuable decision on Constructive Res judicata. Crux of the Decision Facts in a Nutshell Grounds in Appeal before the Supreme Court Res Judicata under Section 11 CPC Section 11 of the…
Can the Forest Tribunal Render a Finding on Title so as to Operate as Res Judicata?
No. In view of the AUTOMATIC vesting of private forests in the Government, the enquiry before the Forest Tribunal is confined to determining whether the land is a private forest or cultivated land. The The Kerala Private Forest (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971, does not contemplate a substantive adjudication of title. Any observation or finding…
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
Follow My Blog
Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.
Saji Koduvath Associates 