Sec 33, 40 to 43 evidence act

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 160

  • @yogeshkumarpandya5112
    @yogeshkumarpandya5112 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you so much sir ji 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻

  • @RKD12-RKD
    @RKD12-RKD 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Where is the video of sec 32 other cause except dying declaration.

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Not recorded,

    • @RKD12-RKD
      @RKD12-RKD 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 Sir when we get those lectures whose are left?

  • @amankamboj4364
    @amankamboj4364 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    NYC sir ji ❤

  • @Amitgupta-V
    @Amitgupta-V 3 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    Best teacher in this world when it comes to explain any point of law specially all the illustration.Thank you sooo much sir You are the one who helps me to understand law and clear all concepts wheather its IPC,CRPC,CPC,EVIDENCE,LIMITATION thank you are you are my inspiration😊

  • @Rakesh-in8zk
    @Rakesh-in8zk 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thanks sir ji

  • @harshittiwari7198
    @harshittiwari7198 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    🙏🙏🙏

  • @bahmniaruby8844
    @bahmniaruby8844 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thankyou so much sir🙏

  • @nishabee-u5v
    @nishabee-u5v 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Zabardast all video sir....... 🙏🏻 🙏🏻 🙏🏻 🙏🏻 🙏🏻 🙏🏻 🙏🏻 🙏🏻 🙏🏻 🙏🏻 🙏🏻 ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

  • @babitakhanna705
    @babitakhanna705 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    13:35 te sir preliminary evidence ch te cross hunda e haini te fe sir aapa kida keh skde cross hogya. I think thodi galat example hogyu pls reply kro te concept te raushni paao. Baaki thank u so much tu c sadi enni help krde o free of cost sbnu pdaake

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      It's true but opposite council with permission put questions in order to rebut the version of complainant

  • @imaramalik7690
    @imaramalik7690 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Video dekhri thi usko stop krke aapki tareefi krne aayi hun " Sir u r amazing " .... Thank you so much 🙏 stay bless always

  • @shruti-ch1mr
    @shruti-ch1mr 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Thank you so much sir ji 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻 really appreciate your hard work for us . May God bless you and your family with good health and long life . huge respect for you sir 🙏🏻🙏🏻

  • @vrushalinarwade6218
    @vrushalinarwade6218 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    THank u sir

  • @shubhambhatt4635
    @shubhambhatt4635 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The way u r explain is very easy to understand the provision..👍

  • @amanjatinder5245
    @amanjatinder5245 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    U r really a Gem Sir..... God has instilled not only the expertise of LAW within u, but has also made u a man of doing generosity who is doing selfless service for the best of his nation

  • @ayushdhami3433
    @ayushdhami3433 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Sir, I have seen a lot of videos but none of them cleared my doubts and made law understandable as you did..
    Thanks a lot 😊

  • @beautifulsongsingh9211
    @beautifulsongsingh9211 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Sir wishing a very happy Diwali ji god bless you sir

  • @Manish-cq3lj
    @Manish-cq3lj 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Soo clearlly explained....thanku sir

  • @sabakalimshaikh4215
    @sabakalimshaikh4215 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Hat's off to your selfless teaching.. respect from Maharashtra...

  • @subhashray2861
    @subhashray2861 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Outstanding sir pranam

  • @chandraprabhaupadhyay3272
    @chandraprabhaupadhyay3272 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    amazing vid sir, huge respect for you 🙏🙏.

  • @princyjain4686
    @princyjain4686 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Tq sir to make such good video it's very helpful for us

  • @littleradhya485
    @littleradhya485 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thanks sir in this lockdown u r lectuer is very helping to understand the topics covered by u

  • @katyanimehta4560
    @katyanimehta4560 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir preliminary evidence m cross examination ka right hota h??cross examination kese krenge preliminary evidence ko if he is dead??

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      No

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      It is recorded with intent to come to the conclusion whether a Prima facie case is made out against the accused to summon him for charge

  • @vishalbhardwaj2980
    @vishalbhardwaj2980 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Hats off sir.. Excellent explanation 🙏

  • @asifhussain5989
    @asifhussain5989 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you sir ...🙏🙏🙏 Well explained

  • @sonasharma4413
    @sonasharma4413 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Bhut bhut dhyanwad sir ji 🙏

  • @My_lyf99
    @My_lyf99 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanku so much sir...

  • @SurendraKumar-sx9ty
    @SurendraKumar-sx9ty 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thanks a lot sir 🥰

  • @meerasingh3626
    @meerasingh3626 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    You teach very well....thank you sir

  • @harshgupta1914
    @harshgupta1914 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir agar session court me faisla suna diya gya hai to log high court me bhi dubara laga dete hai agar insaf nahi mila to vaha par bhi suit file kar dete hai na lawyer. Ku ki hame agar ek case me justice nahi milta to hum same case ko high court tak bhi to lekar jate hai

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yes the aggrieved party can approach uoto higher court to get justice

    • @harshgupta1914
      @harshgupta1914 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 sir lekin apne sec 40 me kaha jo previous judgement show karde court me phir vhi mani jaegi

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      I m taking about general ryt.

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      To understand the sec 40 plz watch vedio on resjudicata in Cpc playlist

  • @amandubey4013
    @amandubey4013 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir, under section 41 of evidence act it says that judgement given on legal character is applicable in rem. whereaas under section 35 of SRA it specifies that if any declaration is given regarding legal character then it would be applicable only on the parties and not to the whole world.
    my doubt is that are'nt section 41 of evidence act and section 35 of SRA contradictory to each other.
    BTW wonderful lecture sir it was very helpful.

    • @Roving2serenity
      @Roving2serenity 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Section 35 SRA is a general provision and Section 41 IEA is only talking about those judgements,decree or order which are related to matrimonial, probate, admirality or insolvancy courts. These matters are considered to be the matters of social concern.

  • @mukeshkumar-kh2fh
    @mukeshkumar-kh2fh 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    good morning sir...example for sec. 42 ...which is of trespass...why is it not conclusive proof eventhough it is decided in favour of B??

  • @PoojaGupta-nq3wj
    @PoojaGupta-nq3wj 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    thku so much sir

  • @vishalgaur7501
    @vishalgaur7501 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Nice sir 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

  • @sudhanshusingh2437
    @sudhanshusingh2437 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Sir u'r videos of evidence and CPC are very helpful....... Huge respect for you🙏🙏 plz make videos on CRPC as well🙏🙏🙏

  • @chinuruhal7540
    @chinuruhal7540 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir, kya aapne sirf s/32(1) hi krwaya h, remaining clause nhi krwaye

  • @aamaadmilegal4598
    @aamaadmilegal4598 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Thank you so much sir.. this video is very much helpful in understanding the given topics of Evidence Act.
    Pls make more videos sir. 🙏

  • @manshiaggarwal2358
    @manshiaggarwal2358 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir judgment in rem and judgment in personam kya hota hai h plz explain

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Rem means against the whole world, personam means against the person

  • @jashowantnaik9944
    @jashowantnaik9944 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir in 14:35 me apne bola ki if A died the evidence can be given in later proceeding. But sir yanha to opposite party dwara prosecution cross examine hua nahi. To kese admissible hua?? Yaahan to court examination kiya dn cognizance liya dn summons warrant issue kiya

  • @jituburman1527
    @jituburman1527 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    It seems, it is logical that if any previous statement has not suffered cross-examination, should not get conclusive status (I e. remains a weak evidence)..Thus in complaint case, at pre-cognizance stage, in which no opportunity was there to cross examine, the statement earlier given can not be automatically admitted without cross examination...

    • @furqanmohd6225
      @furqanmohd6225 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Sir during pre evidence examination of complaint and his witnesses are examined but I don't understand who cross examined them when accused has not so far summoned by the court. So condition as to the right of cross examination is fulfilled. Then how is the statement in previous proceeding relevant? Please explain.

    • @jituburman1527
      @jituburman1527 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@furqanmohd6225 It seems, in a complaint case Court's prima facie satisfaction on the statement made by complainant and it's witness, make him initiate proceeding against accused..But like statement u/s 161 crpc (police investigation/report), such statements as made prior to accused gets summoned are relevant ( since having some basic value ) as based on the same premise the case got structured..But it does not mean that after accused come into picture he would not be allowed to cross examine such witness/ facts, (as happens in statement u/s 161 crpc)

  • @eksafar7337
    @eksafar7337 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    great sir ...aapke lecture bahut helpful hai.👍 par ye sub example Canada par kyu jate hai😜😆

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Me khudh nahi ja saka Canada issue😊

    • @TheMehulkhanna
      @TheMehulkhanna ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 sir aap th ADA ho aapne kya krna jaake canada life as an ADA is rewarding enough k nahi sir? M also aspirant of ADA

  • @awadheshsingh9247
    @awadheshsingh9247 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Jab court ne maana ki 'B' 'A' ki wife h aur D ne B ke sath adultery commit kiya h aur use convict ... Phir yahi judgement ki wet married couple h ..bigamy waali proceed ing Mai kyu nhi apply hoga ....kya ye judgement in rem nhi h ..kya judgement sec56 Mai fall nhi karega ....

  • @shahsandeep
    @shahsandeep 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    sir please guide where is other sections of evidence act , sec 34, 35,36,37,38,39,41,42. Please make a video of this.

    • @shahsandeep
      @shahsandeep 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      sir plz update

  • @PrettyGirlpreesha
    @PrettyGirlpreesha 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank u sirji

  • @rajnigulia7885
    @rajnigulia7885 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    If the facts are same in the defamation case situation be same but separate proceeding or party also be not same .. then in that case can we use the judgement or decree of A ..? And can it be used to proved the character credibility ..?

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      No, judgments can only be used under section 40 to 43

    • @rajnigulia7885
      @rajnigulia7885 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Harpreet Singh Kahlon ...sir can you tell us .. admission investigation start hone se phle di jati h or confession during the investigation ..? Or agr investigation ke bech me koi 3rd person statement de rha h to kya vo admission h ..? But accused statement investigation se phle police officer ke samne dega to vo relevant hogi or admissible b ..? Dipak bhai v Gujarat state case .. kya ye sari chiz sir shi h jisse mere points clear ho ske😇

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Confession before trial that means before charge, admission at any time, plead guilty after charge that means during trial

    • @rajnigulia7885
      @rajnigulia7885 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Harpreet Singh Kahlon ... sir seriously I’m shocked 🙈🙈kuch b kh lo sir aapka fast reply bhut satisfaction de deta h or seriously you are providing better than an institute ..💫sir thanks for your effort I wish that you’ll achieve what you want ..thanks once again sir 😇

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Welcome g

  • @singh__govind
    @singh__govind 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir sec 40 res judicata ki bat krta h sirf ?.... Mtlb jo phle decide ho chuka h fir se usi k bare m case nhi hoga.... But bare act m pdne pr alg lg rha h sec 40 ..

  • @gunpreetkaur3060
    @gunpreetkaur3060 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thanku sir.. .for ur great efforts . .... concepts totally cleared.

  • @shahosman178
    @shahosman178 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir,
    Why did you skip sec 34-39?

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I think it's not so difficult so I thought that student can do it themselves, but will do if u want

    • @shahosman178
      @shahosman178 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      thank you sir, i will try those sections by myself.
      Sir, would you please publish a book including your notes?

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Yes, already typed and I m going to recheck those notes, after that I will provide u

    • @shahosman178
      @shahosman178 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      Sir,
      Eagerly waiting for the book.

  • @PVR2253
    @PVR2253 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir illustration B nhi samjh aayi kyoki adultery mei bhi toh khi na khi ye sabit hua tha ki C hi A ki wife h toh usko bigamy mei kyo use nhi kr skte

  • @shraddhatiwari2730
    @shraddhatiwari2730 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir section 33 criminal nd civil dono proceedings mai apply hota hai... please bata diziye...

  • @sejalchawla126
    @sejalchawla126 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    zabardast sir 👌

  • @ashutosh9139
    @ashutosh9139 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Sir i have a doubt in section 43. Sir as per your explanation of illustration b.. both adultery and bigamy cases are different and thus decree cant be used but sir isnt fact in issue same as both are dealing with the same question Whether C was the wife of A or not and since it was already decided on merit aftet B's contention then why it cant be used in subsequent case??

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Did the first judgment says that C is A's wife, it simply convicted B for committing adultery and in the same case B took the defence that C is not A's wife. And in the subsequent case the issue is whether C is A's wife. This fact can't be proved by giving the judgment in which B was convinced as the marriage is to be proved through proper evidence

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      First judgment was passed in which person was convicted for adultery, Bcz in those cases marriage is not needed to be proved strictly as per the HMA.

  • @surinderkumar3842
    @surinderkumar3842 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir, good afternoon,as per your lecture regarding section 33 evidence act, sir,as per my knowledge if any complaint filed against accused,first of all, preliminary evidence, secondly precharge evidence thirdly after charge evidence,in complaint case three times evidence will be recorded as per my knowledge,but you have stated in your lecture two time evidence will be recorded, please explain

  • @shivendratiwari4482
    @shivendratiwari4482 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Great job sir

  • @daminik6389
    @daminik6389 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    sir, just to confirm , section 33 does not include the evidence at the stage of INVESTIGATION, right?

  • @gauravdadhich9529
    @gauravdadhich9529 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir executive magistrate crpc k konsi konsi sections main statement record karta hain?
    Can you please specify those particular sections?
    Would be very thankful to you 🙏🙏🙏

  • @pctecnics.3384
    @pctecnics.3384 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir in the second example of adultery, the court had declared the marriage legal status of A and B and according to section 41 it will fall under matrimonial clause.the legal character of the marriage became valid from that judgement date.So why that cannot be used in the bigamy case because it should be relevant according to section 41 matrimonial clause?

    • @Roving2serenity
      @Roving2serenity 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      For adultery IPC is applicable according to example...example is saying A prosecutes B...which means it is a matter decided by criminal court and not matrimonial court so sec. 41 is not applicable. In adultery case fact in issue is whether B has committed adultry with the wife of A. On the other hand the fact in issue is whether marriage between B and C has taken place or not....So 1 is criminal matter other is matrimonial matter and issues in both these cases are different.

  • @soumensikder3392
    @soumensikder3392 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir.. what is difference between competent court and incompetent court

    • @soumensikder3392
      @soumensikder3392 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Acctually I mean meaning

    • @legaleducationstudies277
      @legaleducationstudies277 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Competent court means a court has the all jurisdiction(Territorial and pecuinary) to try a suit, And incompetent court means lack of jurisdiction or erroneous jurisdiction

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      And also regarding the subject matter

    • @legaleducationstudies277
      @legaleducationstudies277 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 yes sir

  • @amanjatinder5245
    @amanjatinder5245 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir,
    In section 33 there is a PROVISO that the ADVERSE PARTY IN THE FIRST PROCEEDING HAD THE RIGHT AND OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE.....
    SO the preliminary evidence which is rendered in complaint cases before summoning, whether that statement can be read if during post charge evidence witness is unavailable (I understand that u had very kindly illustrated it in the video).... BUT the thing which I could not grip is that "WHEN PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE IS NOT CROSS EXAMINED, THEN WHETHER THESE STATEMENTS CAN BE READ?????? " AS FAR AS I COULD GUESS THAT HIS SOLE STATEMENT IN HIS ABSENCE WOULD BE LESS RELIABLE IF THERE IS NO OTHER EVIDENCE TO CORROBORATE HIS/HER STATEMENT "......
    Would wait for your feedback Sir or if any fellow aspirant is able to comment, it would be grateful.

    • @TheMehulkhanna
      @TheMehulkhanna ปีที่แล้ว

      Same doubt here too but i think nahi hoga applicable kyunki right to cross hoti hi nhi 200 crpc me yaha sir se thodi glti hogyi h lgta

  • @babyrani4431
    @babyrani4431 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanku.... Sir under sec 33 the subsequent proceedings means in the same case only or it can be relevant for any other case ?

    • @amanjatinder5245
      @amanjatinder5245 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Mam,
      In section 33 there is a PROVISO that the ADVERSE PARTY IN THE FIRST PROCEEDING HAD THE RIGHT AND OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE.....
      SO the preliminary evidence which is rendered in complaint cases before summoning, whether that statement can be read if during post charge evidence witness is unavailable (I understand that u had very kindly illustrated it in the video).... BUT the thing which I could not grip is that "WHEN PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE IS NOT CROSS EXAMINED, THEN WHETHER THESE STATEMENTS CAN BE READ?????? " AS FAR AS I COULD GUESS THAT HIS SOLE STATEMENT IN HIS ABSENCE WOULD BE LESS RELIABLE IF THERE IS NO OTHER EVIDENCE TO CORROBORATE HIS/HER STATEMENT "......
      Would wait for your feedback Mam or if any fellow aspirant is able to comment, it would be grateful. I have also put this comment/query in the main page of this link as well🙏🙏

    • @BabyBaby-rs1tn
      @BabyBaby-rs1tn 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@amanjatinder5245 even if that witness was not cross examined ...it will be relevant but that party should had the opportunity earlier

  • @akhileshdwivedi6110
    @akhileshdwivedi6110 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Good Morning sir..
    Aapki notes li maine..kaafi aachi & helpful h.
    Kya cpc, crpc , ipc ki bhi notes release hongi jldi hi?
    Thanks

  • @shivangmahajan8133
    @shivangmahajan8133 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Please make a video regarding section 34/149 ipc

  • @bhavikmehta4898
    @bhavikmehta4898 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir section 33 .appeal mein applicable hai.???

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Generally no, but sometimes advocates moves an application for additional evidence in that case court in the end of justice may allow to record the evidence and can also remand back the case

  • @souravpal4184
    @souravpal4184 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Sir, the 2nd illustration in the matter of Matrimonial.then it should be relevant u/s 41.
    Thanks

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Judgment in which any character was declared or denied is relevant u/s 41

  • @sparkleevanagy
    @sparkleevanagy 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir 33 is relevant only in subsequent proceeding does this include appeal or other similar case?

  • @aartidunkhwal5541
    @aartidunkhwal5541 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Thank you so much

  • @reshmachaudhary7909
    @reshmachaudhary7909 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Sir...Are sec34 to39 important???
    Plss tell me..bcz uh have skip these sections!!!

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      I have skipped as it normally comes in pre exam with rare chance, but not so important for main exam.

    • @reshmachaudhary7909
      @reshmachaudhary7909 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 ohkk sirr😊🤗thnx for uhr quick response😍

  • @manshiaggarwal2358
    @manshiaggarwal2358 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Then 43 section Mai muje confusion hai clear ni hua

  • @ardxxxxx
    @ardxxxxx 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you so much sir... 🙏

  • @yusratalib
    @yusratalib 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thanks a lot🙏

  • @karamsingh4279
    @karamsingh4279 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Seprate suit me A or B ko alag alag case prove karna padega

  • @PoojaGupta-nq3wj
    @PoojaGupta-nq3wj 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Thku sir

  • @sanjeevverma9789
    @sanjeevverma9789 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    👌👌👌👌

  • @arpitmishra940
    @arpitmishra940 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    A sues B for a declaration of title to the land and obtain a decree.
    A then sues C for possession.
    C contends that B is owner and that he is in possession as B's tenants.
    Sir section 40 apply hoga ya section 42?

  • @200vaibhav1
    @200vaibhav1 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    sir ek video judgements in rem & in personam evidence act ka part hai. please sir

  • @bhavikmehta4898
    @bhavikmehta4898 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir.. can section 41 be rebutted by section 44..?? Though section 41 is conclusive proof..??
    If someone obtain a judgement u/s 41 by fraud means... then it will be a conclusive proof..???

  • @suniljha8759
    @suniljha8759 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir please upload sec 17 to 22 of evidence and ipc videos

  • @rishabhchawla8024
    @rishabhchawla8024 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank you sir

  • @krittikasinghh
    @krittikasinghh 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Thank you, sir, for your videos and the efforts you put in making these . the way you explain things is amazing. I've been following your channel since past few months. I am short of words for how grateful I am to you, thank you again sir!

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      My pleasure to serve the law community.

    • @amanjatinder5245
      @amanjatinder5245 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Mam,
      In section 33 there is a PROVISO that the ADVERSE PARTY IN THE FIRST PROCEEDING HAD THE RIGHT AND OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE.....
      SO the preliminary evidence which is rendered in complaint cases before summoning, whether that statement can be read if during post charge evidence witness is unavailable (I understand that u had very kindly illustrated it in the video).... BUT the thing which I could not grip is that "WHEN PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE IS NOT CROSS EXAMINED, THEN WHETHER THESE STATEMENTS CAN BE READ?????? " AS FAR AS I COULD GUESS THAT HIS SOLE STATEMENT IN HIS ABSENCE WOULD BE LESS RELIABLE IF THERE IS NO OTHER EVIDENCE TO CORROBORATE HIS/HER STATEMENT "......
      Would wait for your feedback Sir or if any fellow aspirant is able to comment, it would be grateful.

    • @katyanimehta4560
      @katyanimehta4560 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@amanjatinder5245 actually...my question was same as yours and sir ne answer bhi diya h mere comment par...aap check krskte haii

  • @sattagurusattaguru6427
    @sattagurusattaguru6427 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir
    Key points for 43 ?

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  5 ปีที่แล้ว

      All judgments r irrelevant unless judgments r itself fact in issue.
      A is charged with theft and with having been previously convicted of theft. The previous conviction is relevant as a fact in issue, so here previous judgment is relevant

  • @travelyaar9862
    @travelyaar9862 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir crpc kab shuru karenge ?

  • @kumargaurav1385
    @kumargaurav1385 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sir section 69 evidence act smja do??

    • @harpreetsinghkahlon2827
      @harpreetsinghkahlon2827  5 ปีที่แล้ว

      It's so simple if no attesting witnesses r found than u just prove their handwriting/signature by producing the handwriting of witnesses or documents bearing their signature

  • @LovePreet-xd5eu
    @LovePreet-xd5eu 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Wonderful

  • @mayurakshisarkar5225
    @mayurakshisarkar5225 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Excellent !!

  • @Manish-cq3lj
    @Manish-cq3lj 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Soo clearlly explained....thanku sir

  • @ashutoshpany126
    @ashutoshpany126 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you sir

  • @mayurakshisarkar5225
    @mayurakshisarkar5225 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you so much

  • @Manish-cq3lj
    @Manish-cq3lj 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Soo clearlly explained....thanku sir

  • @ashutoshpany126
    @ashutoshpany126 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you sir

  • @Ankit123zinking
    @Ankit123zinking 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you Sir

  • @sangeetasrivastava2239
    @sangeetasrivastava2239 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thank you sir