Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VI: Important Questions for Judiciary, APO & University Exams | Part - VI of X
Legal Bites brings to you Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VI.
Legal Bites brings to you Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VI. The questions enlisted here are arranged section-wise and will aid the students preparing for Judiciary, APO or University Exams. The list of questions curated by Legal Bites will help candidates identify the important and frequently asked questions and give them a good practise for their aptitude and knowledge.
Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VI
We know answer writing is a continuous exercise that is an inalienable part of the preparation process for any Examination. A well-written answer not only reflects the knowledge of an aspirant but also his/her ability to tailor the content in a manner suited to meet the expectations of the question.
Rigorous preparation for this exam is mandatory in order to crack it. In the last few months prior to the exams, it is sufficient for candidates to simply keep practising these questions in order to gain mastery over the subjects studied. Not only the candidate’s confidence level but also their scores will show good improvement upon following it.
Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VI of X
- Judgment in rem, and;
- Judgment in personam.
A sues B for trespass on his land. B alleges the existence of a public right of way over the land, which A denies. Is the existence of decree in favour of the defendant (C), in a suit by A against C for a trespass on the same land, in which C alleged the existence of the same right of way, relevant or conclusive proof that right of way exists? [W.B.J.S. 1997]
A prosecutes B for adultery with C. A’s wife. B denies that C is A’s wife, but the court convicts B for adultery. Afterwards, C is prosecuted for bigamy in marrying B during A’s lifetime. C pleads that she was never the wife of A. Is the judgment against B in the former case relevant against C in the latter case? [VV.B.J.S. 1998, 1990, U.P.C.J. 1988, U.P.A.P.O. 1997]
A prosecutes B for stealing a cow from him. B is convicted. The cow had been sold by B to C. A brings a suit against C for recovery of the cow and produces the judgment against B in support of his claim. Is the judgment relevant? Give reasons for your answer. [W.B.J.S. 1998, U.P.A.P.O., 1996]
In a trial for an offence, the prosecution adduces evidence of the bad character of the accused. The accused objects to the admissibility of prosecution evidence on the ground that he has not given evidence of his good character. Decide.
“No fact of which the court will take judicial notice need be proved.” Critically examine this statement and state the facts which the court must take judicial notice. [M.P.C.J. 2013, Bihar J. 1979, U.K.C.J. 2015]
The plaintiff filed a suit for partition of a property basing his right under a registered will and produced a certified copy of the Will (Ex. A/1) will the plaint. The defendant in the written statement pleaded that the said will was revoked by the testator during his lifetime. During the argument, the defendant contended that the will is not properly proved and even if there is no dispute in the written statement about the validity and genuineness of the Will formal proof of the Will be examining one of the testators is necessary before the will is read in evidence and one of the testators is admittedly alive. (Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act provided that if a document is required to be attested, (like a will), it shall not be used as evidence until one of the attesting witnesses at least has been called as a witness for proving its execution if there be one testator alive.) Dispose of the argument of the defendant by an order. [D.J.S. 1991]
The genuineness of a signature on a document was a dispute. Parties produced evidence on the point but did not examine handwriting experts. The trial judge himself compared the disputed signature with the admitted signature of the alleged executants. He held that the disputed signature was a forgery. In the appeal, this finding was assailed. Decide and give reasons. [D.J.S. 1990]
Is a document of title, which is more than 20 years old and the basis of the suit, admissible under Section 90 of the Evidence Act? Will it not be correct to say that sub-Section (2) of Section 90-A inserted by the U.P. Civil Laws Amendment Act, overrides Section 90?
“Oral evidence cannot be substituted for the written evidence, of any contract which the parties have put into writing”. Explain and illustrate. [H.R. 1996]. Explain and illustrate the principle of exclusion of oral by documentary evidence.
A filed a suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Amravati alleging that she had purchased the house and made improvements in the house. Being in need of money she entered into an agreement with B for a loan of Rs. 20,000/-. It was decided that simultaneously she should execute nominal documents of sale and rent note. These documents i.e. sale deed and rent note were never intended to be acted upon and she had to pay interest of Rs 18% per annum on the loan. It was stated that B was attempting to enforce the document as a sale deed. The declaration was prayed that she continued to the owner of the house. In defence, B maintained that the sale deed represented the true transaction and the ownership of the house has passed to him. During the trial, A wanted to produce oral evidence that the sale deed was a sham document and never intended to be acted upon. An objection was raised by B that A cannot be permitted to produce oral evidence contrary to the contents of the sale deed. Decide the said objection. Give reasons. [D.J.S. 1989]