LEGALEYE

Watch Video by clicking the link below LANDLAWS   ਜਮੀਨ ਦੀ ਪੈਮਾਇਸ਼ LEGALEYE Litigation Series ( L-5 ) ਜ਼ਮੀਨੀ ਕਾਨੂੰਨ In all the areas consolidated on the basis of the Standard measure of a karam of 66 inches:- 1 Karam (66 inches) …… 1.6764 metres 1 Sarsahi (Square karam) …… 2.81031696 Square metres. 1 Marla (9 Sarsahis) …… 25.29285264 Square metres 1 Kanal (20 marlas) …… 505.8570528 Square metres 1 Ghumao (Acre of 4840 Sq. yards-8 kanals) …… 4046.8564224 Square metres III. In the areas consolidated on the basis of the local measure and the non- consolidated areas of Ludhiana District and t he erstwhile princely State of Jind. 1 Gatha (99 inches) …… 2.5146 metres 1 Biswansi (Square Gatha) …… 6.32321316 Sq. metres. 1 Biswa (20 Biswansis) …… 126.4642632 Sq. metres 1 Bigha (3025 Sq. yards – 20 Biswas) …... 2529.285264 Sq. metres IV. In the areas consolidated on the basis of the local measure and the non-consolidated areas of Amritsar, Gurdaspur (except Shahpur hill cir

  Alternate Dispute Resolution: Complementary or Antithesis to our Adversarial System   of Justice - A Critical Appraisal *Viveka Dalal “Discourage litigation. Persuade your clients to compromise, whenever you can.  Point out to them the nominal winner is often a real loser; in fees, expenses and  waste of time. As a peace-maker, the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good person.” Abraham Lincoln   The Indian Judicial System is one of the oldest legal systems of the World which follows adversarial litigation in which both the sides present arguments before the Court of law.The responsibility for the production of evidence is placed on the parties while the judge acts as an umpire. There is pendency of the cases coupled with the delay in the administration and disposal of cases in the Adversarial system. CJI Ramana said among the several factors that contribute to delays in courts is “an Indian phenomenon called ‘luxurious litigation i.e it is a specific type of li

  Right of the accused under section 313 Cr.P.C.: A critical appraisal  *Sehajpreet Kaur Batth This provision is based on the principle “audi alterem partem” which means no one should be left unheard. Its gives an opportunity to the accused to represent himself and gives him a chance to justify the evidences put forth against him. In the case of Paramjeet singh v. state of uttrakhand 1 , Hon'ble court held that, the intention if the accused must be brought forward in relation to evidences which are against him, so he can offer explanation against such evidences. So, the court is under legal obligation to bring towards his notice such evidences, and evidences not produced shouldn't be considered. This provision enshrines one of the basic principles of fair trial but is ironically, prone to getting ignored during a trial. This could be blamed at the leniency of this provision as it relies on the discretion of the court. In the case of Sanatan Naskar & Anr. v. State of

  Proving electronic evidence in proceedings with reference to the provisions of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and the judgements of the Supreme Court. Shahin Hardy* Introduction In today's advanced world, use of technology or internet is not limited to establish scientific or academic research, but is evolving each day to become accessible to every individual for their various needs with just a tap on the screen. However, unlike the real world, the virtual world comes with a bundle of drawbacks giving rise to the commission of numerous cyber crimes such as phishing, pornography, hacking, and so on. Realising the growing dependency of electronic means of communications, digitalisation of businesses and storing records, etc. the need for changes in the laws relating to information technology, as well as rules governing the admissibility of electronic documents as evidence in both civil and criminal proceedings were required. For this exact reason, the Indian legislature introduc