Understanding Indian Evidence Act

Summary

Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, addresses the burden of proving a person is alive if they havent been heard from for seven years. Key cases include Lallu Yeshwant Singh v. Rao Jagdish Singh, Jagdish Prasad v. State, and Kotturuswami v. Veeravva, which discuss the presumption of death and related legal implications.

Full Conversation

bharatiya sakshya adhinayam
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhinayam is the Indian Evidence Act, *. Section * of this Act deals with the "Burden of Proof as to ownership." It states that when a person is found to be in possession of anything, the burden of proving that he is not the owner is on the person who affirms that he is not the owner.
Do you need information on any specific aspect of this section or related legal assistance?
section * of Indian Evidence Act
Section * of the Indian Evidence Act, *, deals with the "Burden of proving that a person is alive who has not been heard of for seven years." Here are the key points:
- If a person has not been heard of for seven years by those who would naturally have heard of them, the burden of proving that the person is alive is on the person who affirms it.
- This section is relevant in cases involving presumption of death for purposes like inheritance or marriage dissolution.
Let me know if you need more details or assistance!
give citations related to section * of Indian Evidence Act
Case Rating: *
Here are a few important legal citations related to Section * of the Indian Evidence Act, *:
- *Lallu Yeshwant Singh v. Rao Jagdish Singh*, AIR * SC *: This case discusses the presumption of death after a person has not been heard from for seven years.
- *Jagdish Prasad v. State*, AIR * SC *: This case deals with the burden of proof regarding the presumption of death.
- *Kotturuswami v. Veeravva*, AIR * SC *: This case illustrates the legal implications of presumption under Section *.
If you need further assistance, feel free to ask!