LLM Notes: Data Collection Methods in Legal Research

 Data collection is a foundational element of legal research, providing the empirical evidence required to address research questions and develop sound legal arguments. This article explores various data collection methods employed in legal research, encompassing both traditional and modern techniques.

Traditional Data Collection Methods

1) Doctrinal Legal Research: This method relies heavily on analyzing legal theories, principles, and established legal positions.

 2)Library Research: This is a core technique for gathering information, using resources such as textbooks, law reviews, court decisions, and legal encyclopedias. Effective library use involves navigating these resources efficiently to find relevant information.

Print Page

Whether review is maintainable against observation loosely made by court?

 The final contention of Mr. Sen is equally unappealing to afford a ground for review. The Division Bench may have referred to "easementary right" without any such claim being traceable in the pleadings but nothing turns on it in favour of the petitioners, as rightly contended by Mr. Sinha. We do not see reason to hold that by referring to "easementary right" the Division Bench committed such an error that the same would require rectification on review. It was an observation loosely made without affecting the ultimate conclusion that was reached and we allow the matter to rest here.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA

R.V.W.O. No. 44 of 2016, G.A. No. 2924 of 2016 arising out of GA 1950 of 2016 in APO 212 of 2016 arising out of GA No. 932 of 2016 in CS No. 136 of 2006

Decided On: 17.05.2017

A.K.R. Consultants (P) Ltd. and Ors.

Vs.

 Asha Keshri and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Dipankar Datta and Arijit Banerjee, JJ.

Citation: AIR 2017 Cal 176

Print Page

Whether observation made by court in proceeding U/S 145 CRPC is relevant in rent control proceeding?

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 345 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 3989 of 2014)

Decided On: 13.01.2015

Surinder Pal Kaur Vs. Satpal

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:Dipak Misra and Prafulla C. Pant, JJ.

We have considered the rival submissions of the parties on the above point. It is settled position of law that the observations made in the proceedings drawn Under Section 145 Code of Criminal Procedure do not bind the competent court in a legal proceedings initiated before it. A decision given Under Section 145 Code of Criminal Procedure has relevance in evidence to show one or more of the following facts:

(a) that there was a dispute relating to a particular property;
(b) that the dispute was between the parties;
(c) that such dispute led to the passing of a preliminary order Under Section 145(1) Code of Criminal Procedure or an order of attachment issued Under Section 146(1) Code of Criminal Procedure; and
(d) that the Magistrate found particular party or parties in possession or fictional possession of the disputed property.

12. In Shanti Kumar Panda v. Shakuntala Devi MANU/SC/0863/2003 : (2004) 1 SCC 438, this Court has held, in paragraph 15, that the reasoning recorded by the Magistrate or other findings arrived at by him have no relevance and are not admissible in evidence before the competent court (except for the limited purposes enumerated above). Also, it was further held in said case that the words "competent court" as used in Sub-section (1) of Section 146 of the Code do not necessarily mean a civil court only. A competent court is one which has the jurisdictional competence to determine the question of title or the rights of the parties with regard to the entitlement as to possession over the property forming the subject-matter of proceedings before the Executive Magistrate.

Citation; AIR 2015 SC 2739

Print Page