Dating and relating lj Sex chat without any credit cards
No finding of recent complaint has been made relative to the complainants report to her mother (see: her evidence also at p.41 & p.59) at about 5.30 p.m. about 8 hours later) but in any event such a complaint even if recent could not in law amount to corroboration. To decide this the Court has to consider the scope of the Order. where there is no reasonable doubt as to the claim of the plaintiff to recover possession of the land or as to wrongful occupation on the land without licence or consent and without any right, title or interest thereto.This aspect is covered in detail in The Supreme Court Practice, 1993 Vol 1, O.113/1-8/1 at page 1602 and I state hereunder the relevant portions in this regard: This Order does not provide a new remedy, but rather a new procedure for the recovery of possession of land which is in wrongful occupation by trespassers. I have carefully considered all the affidavit evidence adduced in this case and the written and oral legal submissions from both counsel.For instance, on a charge of this nature, the accused should be informed that he is charged with unlawful carnal knowledge of a particular girl of a specific age and that he had no reasonable cause to believe that she was of or above the age of sixteen years; and the record should disclose that the charge was explained accordingly. accused are involved it is frequently necessary ... each accused and to direct the jury to consider them separately. He must consider the case against each accused separately, being careful to distinguish the evidence admissible against one accused from that admissible against another. In the present case despite Roshni not being called to testify, the trial magistrate said (at p.8): I have come to the conclusion that there was an early complaint by the victim. (Appeals allowed; retrial ordered.)  45 FLR 74 HIGH COURT OF FIJI ISLANDS BAIJU v. Therefore the land falls within the exemption under s.3(1)(a) of ALTA.In the appeal before me the appellants attention was not drawn to the proviso. In similar vein the Fiji Court of Appeal said in Anthony Steven v. He must resist any temptation to bolster up a weak case against one accused by reference to evidence properly admissible only against some other accused (or by looking at the evidence as a whole). I turn next to deal with the corroborative evidence relied upon by the trial magistrate in his judgment, namely, the complainants medical report (Ex.1) and the mothers evidence. This conclusion was unwarranted as being based solely on the complainants self-serving evidence and cannot be relied upon as evidence of recent complaint. In light of the foregoing I am firmly of view that it would be unsafe to allow the appellants convictions to remain. JAI KUMAR [HIGH COURT, 1999 (Pathik J) 31 March] Civil Jurisdiction Land- application for possession- whether procedure for obtaining possession against trespassers is available against a former licensee- High Court Rules 1988 Order 113. Counsel says that the alleged payment of rent was penal rent payable on behalf of the Plaintiff and that does not create a tenancy in the defendant.She told her mother about the rape as soon as she met her. Determination of the issue This action is brought under Or 113 of The High Court Rules which inter alia in Rule 1 reads as follows: Where a person claims possession of land which he alleges is occupied solely by a person or persons (not being a tenant or tenants holding over after the termination of the tenancy) who entered into or remained in occupation without his licence or consent or that of any predecessor in title of his, the proceedings may be brought by originating summons in accordance with the provisions of this Order. This Order is narrowly confined to the particular remedy stated in r.1.In this latter regard it is note-worthy that the only finding of recent complaint in the trial magistrates judgment relates to the complainants claim that after being raped she had immediately gone to one Roshnis house in the neighbourhood and related the incident to her (see: p.41 & p.2 of the judgment). The question for Courts determination is whether the plaintiff is entitled to possession under this Order. It is also to be noted, as the White Book says at p.1603: this Order would normally apply only in virtually uncontested cases or in clear cases where there is no issue or question to try, i.e.
For these reasons and for this error on the part of the learned Magistrate the appeal should be allowed. It was more than just a bare denial of opportunity. At most, the medical report confirms that sexual intercourse had recently occurred with the complainant but this falls well short of amounting in law to corroboration of an offence of rape committed by the appellants. In the exercise of the Courts powers under Section 319(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap.21) and bearing in mind the guidance provided in the judgments of the Fiji Court of Appeal in Shinodra v. The High Court declined to grant the order for possession. That there are five dwelling-houses on the land and not just one as the plaintiff has deposed. directly (vide Annexure J to Plaintiffs affidavit of 8.7.98); and from 1988 to 1998 it was agreed with plaintiff the defendant pay appropriate proportional rent directly to NLTB for the piece of land he occupied.
THE STATE [HIGH COURT, 1999 (Fatiaki J) 23 August] Appellate Jurisdiction Crime: evidence and proof- need to consider the defence of each accused separately- rape- recent complaint- not corroborative- evidence of accused implicating co-accused- need for warning- Penal Code (Cap 17) Section 149. As for the complainants mothers evidence, the trial magistrate says in his judgment (again at p.8): Even P. The evidence of the female complainant was in fact not fully corroborated and her complaint to her mother was not corroboration in law (See: R. He says that he has been on the land for 30 years now and that his father and family built the home which he occupies.