Proving Unsoundness of Mind of Executant of a Sale Deed

n proving that an executant in a sale deed is of sound mind, mere production of a medical certificate is not enough while determining the mental state at the time of the execution of a sale deed, and capacity of the executant, but the opinion of the doctor who treated the executant brought on record by examining and cross examining him in the court is necessary, the High Court of Kerala states in Kunhalima vs Mahammed [2024(3)KHC SN 15(Page No 70].

Corroboration of Evidence u/s 157 of IEA

A former statement given by a witness before any authority legally competent to investigate the case at or about the time when the fact took place, needs to be proved to corroborate any later testimony (relating to the same fact or event) given by the witness in the court. Then the former statement is admitted as corroborative evidence when it is consistent with the later testimony, under Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act.

Stridhan Property is Wife’s Absolute Property

Stridhan property is essentially what is gifted to a woman before marriage, at the time of marriage or at the time of bidding of farewell or thereafter and it is an “absolute property” of a woman. The husband has no control over it and it does not become a joint property of the wife and the husband. But he can use it in times of distress and he has a “moral obligation” to restore the same or its value to his wife, says the Supreme Court (SC) in Maya Gopinath v Anoop S B [2024 INSC 334].

No Easement by Necessity if alternate Way Exists

The claimant of an easement right wouldn't be entitled to claim the easement right by necessity when there exists an alternative way to access the claimant’s land, apart from the way over which the easement rights were claimed, the Supreme Court (SC) says in Manish Mahendra Gala v Shalini Bhagwan Avatramani [2024 INSC 293].

No Transfer of Property Occurs If the Transferor has no Title

If someone tries to transfer property rights to another person through a legal document but doesn't actually own those rights, the new owner or their successors won't have the legal right to claim those rights from that document, says the Supreme Court in Kizhakke Vatakandiyil Madhavan (D) Thr LRS v Thiyyurkunnath Meethal Janaki [Citation : 2024 INSC 287].

SC deprecates HC’s Interference in SARFAESI Matters

The Supreme Court (SC) , in PHR Invent Educational Society v UCO Bank & Others, deprecated the High Court's interference in the auction sale proceedings completed by the Bank, on behalf of the borrower, despite having statutory remedy of appeal under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act).