Message: Return type of CI_Session_files_driver::open($save_path, $name) should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::open(string $path, string $name): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice
Message: Return type of CI_Session_files_driver::close() should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::close(): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice
Message: Return type of CI_Session_files_driver::read($session_id) should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::read(string $id): string|false, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice
Message: Return type of CI_Session_files_driver::write($session_id, $session_data) should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::write(string $id, string $data): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice
Message: Return type of CI_Session_files_driver::destroy($session_id) should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::destroy(string $id): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice
Message: Return type of CI_Session_files_driver::gc($maxlifetime) should either be compatible with SessionHandlerInterface::gc(int $max_lifetime): int|false, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice
Self-Serving Statements On Income Without Any Proof Of Financial Resources Won't Suffice To Prove Readiness & Willingness
21 Sep 2019 01:12 pm
The Supreme Court has observed that self-serving statements on income without any proof of financial resources is not sufficient to prove that plaintiff in a suit for specific performance was ready and willing to perform her part of the contract.
In this case, the plaintiff, in order to prove her readiness and willingness, produced in evidence the approval of loan by a bank. Apart from this, the other evidence was only a statement that plaintiff and her husband have income of Rs.80 lakhs per annum and this was not supported by any documentary evidence.
