{"id":309536,"date":"2023-12-17T11:00:52","date_gmt":"2023-12-17T05:30:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=309536"},"modified":"2023-12-17T11:07:29","modified_gmt":"2023-12-17T05:37:29","slug":"sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Never Reported Judgement| When Supreme Court examined proof of marriage to determine legitimacy of children [(1952) 2 SCC 366]"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> In an appeal filed before the Supreme Court, the three-judges bench of B.K. Mukherjea, Chandrasekhara Aiyar and N.H. Bhagwati*<\/span>, JJ., opined that the Patna High Court (‘the High Court’) had rightly pointed out that the Second Court of Sub-Judge, Patna (‘the Trial Court’) did not consider as to why people of different villages had come forward to state on oath that the respondents’ mother was the wife of Appellant 1 and the children were born out of the union between the two. The Supreme Court opined that if the respondents’ mother was really a fallen woman, as claimed by the appellants, it was not consistent with ordinary probabilities that so many witnesses would have come forward to foist her and her children on the appellants’ family. Thus, the Supreme Court opined that the evidence of the witnesses believed as it was by the High Court was right and enough to prove the marriage of the respondents’ mother with Appellant 1. Thus, the Supreme Court opined that the High Court was justified in differing from the finding of fact arrived by the Trial Court and the appellants’ oral and documentary evidence was mostly of negative character which was not sufficient to rebut the positive evidence led by the respondents.<\/p>\n

Background<\/p>\n

In an instant case, the respondents claimed to be the sons of Jethu Mahthon, who was the Appellant 1 in the present case and filed a suit in the Trial Court against the appellants for partition of the joint family properties. The appellants denied that the respondents were the legitimate sons of Appellant 5. The Trial Court opined that the marriage of the respondents’ mother with Appellant 5 was not proved and dismissed the respondents’ suit. Thereafter, the respondents filed an appeal, and the High Court held that the marriage of the respondents’ mother with Appellant 5 was proved and the respondents were the legitimate sons of Appellant 5 and decreed the suit.<\/p>\n

Thus, the appellants filed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court after considering the entire oral evidence on record by both the appellants and the respondents, opined that the view taken by the High Court was quite proper. The Supreme Court observed that all the respondents witnesses had near relations to the respondent’s mother, who might normally be expected to know about her marriage with Appellant 1. However, on the appellants side, with the single exception of Appellant 1 himself, whose evidence was a tissue of contradictions and incoherent statements, none of the family members had come forward to depose in this case.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court opined that the High Court had rightly pointed out that while assessing the value of the witnesses’ evidence in the present case, the Trial Court had not stopped to consider as to why people of different villages had come forward to state on oath that the respondents’ mother was the wife of Appellant 1 and the children were born out of the union between the two. The Supreme Court opined that if the respondents’ mother was really a fallen woman, as claimed by the appellants, it was not consistent with ordinary probabilities that so many witnesses would have come forward to foist her and her children on the appellants’ family. Thus, the evidence of the witnesses believed as it was by the High Court was right and enough to prove the marriage of the respondents’ mother with Appellant 1.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court opined that some of the documentary evidence of the respondents also corroborated the respondents’ story. In the earlier suit proceedings that were filed, it was shown that in 1927 and 1930, Respondent 1 was recognised as the minor son of Appellant 1, and the same was mentioned in the records of those suits by the family members who had the special means of knowledge and this was done before any question arose regarding the marriage of the respondents’ mother with Appellant 1. The Supreme Court opined that this would certainly be the evidence of Respondent 1 being the legitimate son of Appellant 1 as per Section 13<\/a> of the Evidence Act, 1872<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court opined that Awadh Narain, one of the appellants, who was the karta and manager of the appellants’ joint family did not step into the witness box nor did his mother, who was certainly the best person to know if there was a marriage between the respondents’ mother and Appellant 1. Thus, the Supreme Court opined that the High Court was justified in differing from the finding of fact arrived by the Trial Court and the appellants’ oral and documentary evidence was mostly of negative character which was not sufficient to rebut the positive evidence led by the respondents.<\/p>\n

[Jethu Mathon v. Bhatu Mathon, (1952) 2 SCC 366<\/a>, decided on 07-11-1952<\/span>]<\/p>\n

Note: Conclusive proof of legitimacy of children<\/p>\n

Section 112<\/a> of the Evidence Act, 1872<\/a> states that birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy. As per the provision, if any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred eighty days, after the dissolution of marriage, the mother remained unmarried, it shall be conclusive proof that the child is the legitimate son of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when the child could have been begotten.<\/p>\n

*Judgment by- Justice N.H. Bhagwati<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Appellants:<\/span> S.P. Sinha, Senior Advocate (S.C. Sinha, Ambika Prasad and Bawdeshwari Prasad, Advocates, with them);<\/p>\n

For the Respondents<\/span>: N.C. Chatterjee, Senior Advocate (B.K. Saram, Advocate, with them)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on conclusive proof of legitimacy of children<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":309539,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,58675],"tags":[31485,63622,58925,32232,63623,5363],"class_list":["post-309536","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-scc-never-reported-judgments-supreme-court","tag-conclusive-proof","tag-legitimacy-of-children","tag-never-reported-judgment","tag-proof-of-marriage","tag-section-112-of-evidence-act-1872","tag-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSupreme Court\u2019s Never Reported Judgment on conclusive proof of legitimacy of children| SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Supreme Court opined that the evidence of the witnesses believed as it was by the High Court was right and enough to prove the marriage of the respondents\u2019 mother with Appellant 1.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Never Reported Judgement| When Supreme Court examined proof of marriage to determine legitimacy of children [(1952) 2 SCC 366]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court opined that the evidence of the witnesses believed as it was by the High Court was right and enough to prove the marriage of the respondents\u2019 mother with Appellant 1.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-12-17T05:30:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-12-17T05:37:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Never Reported Judgement| When Supreme Court examined proof of marriage to determine legitimacy of children [(1952) 2 SCC 366]\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court\u2019s Never Reported Judgment on conclusive proof of legitimacy of children| SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-12-17T05:30:52+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-12-17T05:37:29+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Supreme Court opined that the evidence of the witnesses believed as it was by the High Court was right and enough to prove the marriage of the respondents\u2019 mother with Appellant 1.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"proof of marriage legitimacy of children\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Never Reported Judgement| When Supreme Court examined proof of marriage to determine legitimacy of children [(1952) 2 SCC 366]\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court\u2019s Never Reported Judgment on conclusive proof of legitimacy of children| SCC Blog","description":"Supreme Court opined that the evidence of the witnesses believed as it was by the High Court was right and enough to prove the marriage of the respondents\u2019 mother with Appellant 1.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Never Reported Judgement| When Supreme Court examined proof of marriage to determine legitimacy of children [(1952) 2 SCC 366]","og_description":"Supreme Court opined that the evidence of the witnesses believed as it was by the High Court was right and enough to prove the marriage of the respondents\u2019 mother with Appellant 1.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-12-17T05:30:52+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-12-17T05:37:29+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Never Reported Judgement| When Supreme Court examined proof of marriage to determine legitimacy of children [(1952) 2 SCC 366]","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/","name":"Supreme Court\u2019s Never Reported Judgment on conclusive proof of legitimacy of children| SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp","datePublished":"2023-12-17T05:30:52+00:00","dateModified":"2023-12-17T05:37:29+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Supreme Court opined that the evidence of the witnesses believed as it was by the High Court was right and enough to prove the marriage of the respondents\u2019 mother with Appellant 1.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"proof of marriage legitimacy of children"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Never Reported Judgement| When Supreme Court examined proof of marriage to determine legitimacy of children [(1952) 2 SCC 366]"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":315970,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/03\/illicit-relation-and-conceiving-child-prior-to-marriage-date-does-not-lead-to-presumption-of-marriage-sc-legal-news-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":309536,"position":0},"title":"Never Reported Judgment | Illicit relation and conceiving a child prior to the date of marriage does not lead to presumption of marriage [(1952) 2 SCC 720]","author":"Simranjeet","date":"March 3, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on presumption of marriage.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"presumption of marriage","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/illicit.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/illicit.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/illicit.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/illicit.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":315292,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/25\/sc-presumption-of-correctness-to-earlier-later-entries-in-revenue-records-unless-earlier-expressly-incorrect-scctimes\/","url_meta":{"origin":309536,"position":1},"title":"Never Reported Judgment| Presumption of correctness on revenue records attaches to both earlier and later entries, unless earlier entries expressly declared incorrect [(1952) 2 SCC 574]","author":"Arushi","date":"February 25, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on presumption of correctness in revenue records.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"presumption of correctness revenue records","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_12.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":313762,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/11\/sc-vague-and-uncertain-agreements-are-not-capable-of-specific-performance-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":309536,"position":2},"title":"Never Reported Judgment| Vague and uncertain agreements in a contract are not capable of specific performance [(1952) 2 SCC 547]","author":"Arushi","date":"February 11, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on specific performance of contract.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"vague uncertain agreements not capable of specific performance","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_1-4.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_1-4.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_1-4.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/nrj_1-4.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":316599,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/10\/sc-in-absence-of-original-document-language-cannot-be-pressed-over-strong-contrary-evidence-scctimes\/","url_meta":{"origin":309536,"position":3},"title":"Never Reported Judgment| In absence of original document, language cannot be pressed much into service over clear and strong contrary evidence [(1952) 2 SCC 754]","author":"Arushi","date":"March 10, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on interpretation of deeds and documents.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"language in document cannot be pressed over strong contrary evidence","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/nrj-3.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/nrj-3.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/nrj-3.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/nrj-3.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":307451,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/19\/sc-conviction-cannot-be-based-on-contradictory-statements-of-eyewitnesses-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":309536,"position":4},"title":"Never Reported Judgment| Conviction cannot be based on \u2018shifty and treacherous\u2019 statements of eyewitnesses [(1952) 2 SCC 186]","author":"Editor","date":"November 19, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on credibility of the witness.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"conviction contradictory statements eyewitness","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/conviction-contradictory-statements-eyewitness.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/conviction-contradictory-statements-eyewitness.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/conviction-contradictory-statements-eyewitness.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/conviction-contradictory-statements-eyewitness.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":312336,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/28\/sc-circumstantial-evidence-must-be-conclusive-before-conviction-in-murder-case-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":309536,"position":5},"title":"Never Reported Judgment| Circumstantial evidence must be very strong and conclusive for conviction in murder case (1952) 2 SCC 491","author":"Arushi","date":"January 28, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on circumstantial evidence.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"circumstantial evidence conclusive in murder case","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/nrj_1-5.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/nrj_1-5.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/nrj_1-5.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/nrj_1-5.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/309536","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=309536"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/309536\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/309539"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=309536"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=309536"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=309536"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}