Cross-Examination Questions: Against a Plaintiff Contesting a Registered Will on the Ground of Testator’s Mental Incapacity Due to Illness

Posted inCross Exam. Questions, Will & Related MattersNo Comments
These sample questions are structured to: Challenge exaggeration of illness Establish mobility and mental capacity Highlight contradiction with registration of the will Suggest tutoring or bias. These questions are illustrative only and must be adapted to the specific facts, pleadings, and documentary record of each case. Counsel should obtain and review all medical records, the registration file, and the attesting witnesses' statements before framing questions for trial.

Supreme Court Raises Concerns Over Use of AI-Generated Fake Judgments in Judiciary

Posted inConstitutional lawNo Comments
The Supreme Court of India, while considering an SLP in Gummadi Usha Rani & Anr. v. Sure Mallikarjuna Rao & Anr, expressed serious displeasure over a trial court’s reliance on non-existent, allegedly Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated case law. The Court added that such misconduct strikes at the very integrity of the adjudicatory process and cannot be brushed aside as a mere error of law.

Pension amount Liable to Be Attached or Seized Once It Reaches His Bank Account

Posted inUncategorizedNo Comments
The Supreme Court, in Union of India v. Radha Kissen Agarwalla and Anr [1969 AIR 762] and in Union of India v. Jyoti Chit Fund & Finance [AIR 1976 SC 1163], consistently held that pension and provident fund amounts retain statutory protection only till they are actually paid to the employee, and that once received, they can be subjected to attachment.

No Need to Summon Sanctioning Officers if Prosecution Sanction is a “Speaking Order”: Kerala Vigilance

Posted inSanction to Prosecute Govt ServantNo Comments
The Vigilance (E) Department, Government of Kerala, via Circular No: VIG-E3/145/2021-VIG dated 29/07/2021, clarified the procedural requirements for proving a prosecution sanction. Drawing from a catena of judgments, including Md. Iqbal Ahmed v. State of AP [1979 Cr LJ 633 (SC)] and State of Rajasthan v. Dr. A. K. Dutta [AIR 1981 SC 2187] etc, and there is no need for the prosecution to summon the authority if the order is "speaking" (reasoned) and reflects an application of mind.