Masterclass lecture sir. The attention to detail is visible throughout the lecture. I don't think anyone can speak better than nagamuthu sir on this topic. Any layman will be able to understand the legal provision such is the simplicity of the speaker.
Giving Best legal videos for Junior Advocates, Senior Advocates and Public. My friends and public are very happy to see legal videos. Likewise give more videos on legal matter in future. Thank U for good legal videos.
Sir, we are very fortunate to listen your articulation of lecture which is so simple to understand . You opted English that's why it is profitable to non-Tamil Advocates like me. Thank you very Sir.
Excellent work of law. So lucid , direct and simple communication which made a complex subject and admittedly in a confused state so very easy to understand and grasp. Thank you so much sir and may God keep you blessed always.
The plains being filed by electronic means the Registry will have to inspect the documents as per IT law. Your Lordship’s enlightening so many of us is the need of the day.
Sir, it was a pleasure to listen to your views.It was such a difficult topic and very few experts are there, particularly on this topic. I really admire your lucidity of thought. Electronic media allowed people like us, who are outside your state to be able to hear your views. Hope we would be able to learn more from you in the future.
I feel in the criminal law field as on today justice nagamuthu is the best in the field. I read somewhere that sir has delivered record number of judgements during his stint in the bench earlier.
How can Shafi Mohammad, which is a 2 judge bench give a verdict contrary to the verdict of a 3 judge bench, and still hold good enough to create a confusion for a future bench to refer the matter to a larger bench ? And when a verdict has been delivered by a 3 judge bench in Anvar PV, then how is it fair to refer the matter to a 3 judge bench again to clear the ambiguity on this point of the law ?
Isn't it correct that "Certificate" can be given to a 'Statemenť alone? See 'statemenť in Sec 3, 8, 32-39, 145, 158, 159 etc. of the Evid. Act. Isn't it something in writing? Isn't there some logic in proving 'statements' alone by 'certificates'?
There is parallel concern,hardly anyone will produce 65b certificate and will prove as secondary only. The solution lies in best evidence rule and special circumstances cases as said where 65b cannot be procured like movie tickets,bills,train tickets but with absolute caution as we know of recent instances of bombay high court,where even court orders were manipulated as because of capacity to tamper.
He has emphasised on the certificate. The certificate if from the person on the computer and printer . The evidence is presented with responsibility so during the case the opposite side has to contradict supported by doc proof in his his evidence .
