Sanjeev Mohan
10 August 2008 at 06:27
Sir,
here the question involved is the admissibility of a digital photograph. whether the C.D produced along with the Photo be treated as Primary evidence? Please refer sitations (AIR,SCC)
Srinivas.B.S.S.T
09 August 2008 at 23:50
In an appeal where there are 26 appellants and sole respondent. The sole respondent died. One of the appellants filed petitions under or22 rl4, or22 rl9 and section5 of limitation act to condone the delay. In all the affidavits accompanying with respective petitions, she sworn the affidavits but it was no where mentioned that she is also swearing the affidavit on behalf of the rest of the petitioners/appellants. Can we say that as she has not sworn the affidavit on behalf of rest of the petitioners/appellants the same is not maintainable? Can I have any citation if possible.
Gururja Rao
09 August 2008 at 20:20
Hi all,
I need a legally valid draft House rent agreement tremination notice u/sec 106 of T.P. Act, Can any body provide it. The tenent premises is at Hyderabad, A.P, and the monthly Rent payable by him is Rs 4000/- Per month. The premises under occupation of tenent need to land lord for his personal requirement, further land lord is also resident of Hyderabad,A.P.
Please help me it is Urgent.
Thank you both sir, The Tenancy was oral. at the time of inception of tenancy the teneant paid Rs2,800/-PM,which is excluding electricity and water charges, every year the tenacy was extended orally.please advise me in the said circumstances can i issue him notice terminating his tenancy u/sec 106 of T.P.Act,if you think I can kindly provide me a draft notice, awaiting eagerly.
parikshit rajvaidya
09 August 2008 at 10:55
Dear sir
We a private limited company have purchased a property having plant in the state of UP through registered sale deed. The property includes Land and machinery.
That means the land is being used for industrial purpose.
Thereafter our company has been merged under scheme of amalgamation and merger with another company and Hon'ble HC approved the said scheme.
Now the matter is thate in the state of
UP how such land can be mutated in the name of company in which our comapny got merged.
Actually we have got impression that under UPLR Act no industrial land can be mutated.
Kindly how the property can be mutated.Pls give your valuable suggestions.
Shekhar
08 August 2008 at 23:56
In 2006 my father in law has takan away the car in hand writing A4 size paper! there in my important file were there due to which i have suffered my Job.... The matter regarding the marraige Null and Void or divorce is going on court... pls. some one guide me to take my things and good back from there, must be some saction through which i can get my things! only her father has confessed the things with one person that his (Mine) things were there...
harish
08 August 2008 at 14:36
sir/madam
i am not getting the supreme court judgements on preponderance of probability in civil cases for reference. pls help me regarding any citation referring the above phrase
KANDE VENKATESH GUPTA
07 August 2008 at 22:49
Dear members, Whether a fish in the pond is immovable property or movable property, please clarify
Tarun Kalra LL.M, M.B.A
07 August 2008 at 18:05
DEAR SIR,
WE GOT THE STAY FROM MAGISTRATE ON SHAMLAT DEH, ADJOINING OUR LAND, THAT THE FOREST OFFICIALS CAN NOT PLANT TREES ON SHAMLAT DEH, AND IN THE WRITTEN STATMENT FILES BY OFFICIALS OF FOREST DEPARTMENT DECLAIRE THAT THEY NEVER PLANTED TREES ON THE ABOVE SAID LAND, AND NOW THE INTERIM INJUNTION IS GRANTED BY THE COURT (SO THEY SAID THAT THEY NEVER PLANTED TREES ON THE LAND, NOW STAY IS GRANTED SO THEY WILL NOT PLANT TREES ON THE LAND) BUT BEFORE FILING WRITTEN STATMENT, THE IN CHEATING PLANT TREES ON LAND,(BUT SHOW MISREPRESENTATION THAT THEY DID NOT PLANT TREES ON LAND, IN THE COURT) NOW SOMEONE UPROOTED THE PLANTS, AND THEY SEND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE FOREST ACT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY TO US,(AS WE SAID THAT(YOU HAVE NEVER PLANTED THE TREES, AS SHOWAN IN THE W/S AND STAY ORDER) BUT THEY ARE ENFORCING US TO ATTED THEIR OFFICE AND THY WANT REVENGE WITH US AS WE FILES A INJUCTION CASE AGAINST THEM, NOW WHAT WE CAN DO AGAINST NOTICE UNSER SECTION 68 OF FOREST ACT, AS WE HAVE STAY ORDER
R.Manivasagan
06 August 2008 at 21:42
I Am for the Plaintiff side.It is suit for Declaration of Title. The 1st Defendant died on 14.07.2007. The 2nd Defendant is one of his son and the 3rd Defendant is his one of the daughters.The counsel for the defendant did not inform about the death of the 1st Defendant. Anyhow immediately after the knowledge we had filed an application on 25.12.2007 to impaled the LRs's of the deceased 1st Defendant (the wife and another son and another daughter). We did not file an application to set aside the abatement for non taking steps within 90 days. Before filing that application I had consulted with a senior Advocate and he advised me that if other Legal Heris of the deceased were already on record, the question of abetment will not arise. so, I had filed the application accordingly, but the Trial Court dismissed our application on the ground that we should file an application to set aside the abetment. Is it correct or shall I file a revision against that order or Can I file a review before the same court. Wether the senior advocates advise is correct or not please answer my query.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Information under RTI act
I have applied for an information from DIOS siddharthnagar ,comprising copy of an order/note sheet ,he is denying to provide the same in writing, on the ground that,it is a confidential document
is he right?