Dhanesh
24 October 2009 at 10:48
Dear Experts
I am being cheated by two companies. one is my own bank and other is that company with which i have my demat account.
I issue a cheque to India Infoline Ltd. (IIL) of Rs.5000/- to give credit to my Demat account on 09/07/2009 from my saving account in Axis Bank. The said cheque was passed from my SB account on 11/07/2009 and the amount was debited. But IIL people are saying that they not received the credit.
Now what should i do?
Dhanesh
Anonymous
23 October 2009 at 23:45
Now a days in metro cities, housing socities construction companies are using foregin places names in india such as Singapore city, Malaysia city etc.(these names can be seen in Hyderabad). Municipal Administration is not objecting while approving plan and giving permission.
My question is
Under what law a suit can be filed to prohibit using foregin places names in India?
Anonymous
23 October 2009 at 23:34
Respected Experts,
We acquired ancestral property/agricultural land in a village. Due to naxalite problem none of our family member is visiting there since past 15 years. If we visit we will be killed. Land has been occupied by the naxalites and they r doing farming. Now when naxal movement will go, Can we claim that land back. Will law of adverse posession apply here, if it will left for some more period. Plz. Advice. Thanks.
vinod bansal
23 October 2009 at 22:18
R/Members
Construction work of Rs. 3,oo,ooo/- was alloted through open tender to a contractor by Marketing board (Govt of Haryana)and written contract was executed in between both parties,contractor has completed his work within time and thereafter demanded his payment in the month of july 2008,but officer of marketing board are continously avoiding payment of contracter,in reply of legal notice they have replied that payment is outstanding due to absence of technical sanction of their higher officer,now what is legal remady available to contractor for recovery of his payment. Thanks
Regards
Abhay
23 October 2009 at 22:11
suppose 'A' makes a proposal to 'B' by letter to sell his house and gives 10 days to reply..now 'B' on 6th day posted his assent by letter but it was not known to 'A' that 'B' has posted him the letter and on 7th day calls him('B') up to revoke the proposal as soon as he calls 'B', 'B' picks up the phone and says that he is agreed to buy now the communication is made between the two....will it b a contract???
is it necessary that acceptance should be done in the same manner as it was offered to the offeree ????
P.K.Haridasan
23 October 2009 at 21:36
In an old 1936 registered documentin Kerala , the name given to it as Mumpattachit.The duration of possession of land was for one year only. What would be status of the holder after one year. Can a joint name holder of the document file a suit for partition now based upon it. Are they not tresspassers after one year. Please enlighten me.
NB
23 October 2009 at 17:18
Sir,
If a civil appeal which has been dismissed by the court in absence of plaintiff, I would like to know where appeal can be filed and what is the time limit for the same.
thanks in advance for anticipation
NNB
sreenu
23 October 2009 at 11:48
i was removed from service after working for 8 months from a private finance company without any intimation and i was not given appointment letter or termination letter.i discharged in that company as a general manager and without reasons my services are terminated.i was given an advance of rs 35000 on condition that every month i have to pay 5000 keeping my not dated cheque for rs 35000 and now the cheque was bounced for lack of fundsand they filed a suit for under niact stating that the cheque was issued for the computer that was brought by me in the capacity of GM of the company and the same is given to his customers who failed to repay the money.they are saying that i purchase the computer and for the same i have to paty the money...kindly assist me in what way i get out from this case and can i get retrenchment compensation in this case if i file a case in labour court
Anonymous
23 October 2009 at 10:35
Haryana rent act.
I being owner has filed a suit for eviction of tenant.
The agreement is between me and the tenant which has been accepted by him.
The agreement clearly says that i am landlord and the the respondent is a tenant.
The tenant filed an application for impleading ot co owners which are my brothers.
The same application was dismissed.
My question is.
if contrary to my case any evidence (affidavit) given by my brothers that they are co owners will affect my eviction petion. As the court has already over ruled the need ot impleading my brothers as co owners. Kinldy let me know the repurcussions(pros and cons) of my brothers appearing as witnesses in the case in favour of my tenant ?
I WANT TO KNOW IF MY BROS IN EVIDCEN SAY THAT THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO EVICT THE TENANT. THEN WHAT WILL BE THE EFFECT ON MY EVIVTION PETION ?
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
reluctant to dispose our I.A
We have a Muslim partition suite pending in Final decree proceedings and is adjourned for 31st of this month, for which preleminary dated almost 1970..
We are LR's of one plaintiff, plaintiff had 3 children two daughters and one son who had predeceased her, but his childrens were wrongly brought on record while filing final decree petition in the year 1989,
plaintiff daughter has filed an Interlocutary application in 2008 to strike out these LR's of predeceased sons children from record as they are not entitle fo share as per Mohameddan law.
Also, In this Final decree proceddings there are 3 non-bonafide subsequent purcahser who has some how been made as parties as additional defendants,
And one of the purchaser has done out of court compromise with some of decree holders except one plaintiff for one of the decree schedule property against the will of lR's of one plaintiff who has objected saying that First the Interlocutary application to strike out LR's of plaintiff who are not entitle for share must be disposed off as there is problem amongs LR"s of one plaintiff must be settled,then any compromise will be entertained by the objecting LR's of plaintiff.
The Honorable court agreed to dispose of our IA to strike out LR's of plaintiff who are not entitle for share and posted our I.A for Orders two hearing back, Now after 2 hearings suddenly Judge is taking a
U-turn and not writing Order on our I.A , further saying he will refer the case to Lokadalat if the parties agreed and try for compromise with subsequent non-bonafide purchasers with out disposing our IA, As per the Judge, as of now tour IA will be kept as it is.., As one of the non-bonafide purchaser is an influential person may be Judge under some influence acting this way,
We are very frustrated, our simple I.A is pending from past 2 years we being Plaintiff , our I.A is not entertained and dispose off, the Judge is more interested in compromising the non-bonafide subsequent purchaser who has no equity as per decree.
We are fed up with this trial court judges atittudes, Can we approach high court as our IA is pending from almost 2 years.