Sumit Vats
24 June 2008 at 19:15
Under which sec. of the IPC or CrPC a person can go when a government officer not performs his job or wilfully neglects it.
Sumit Vats
24 June 2008 at 14:20
Judgments of superme court in granting anticipatory bail in serious offences, particularly in the case of cheating & forgery etc.case under sec -420,471 of ipc.
Bindu
24 June 2008 at 11:49
I am for the accused & the complainant is bank. The matter is at the stage of cross
In the present case the statutory notice is dated 25/06/2007 & no where in the complaint nor affidavit there is whisper of when it was posted, neither the A.D Token issued by the postal authority s exhibited.
The complainant states that the notice which was posted returned intimation Unclaimed & is deemed service as per General clauses . However , the intimation which was posted to the recipient of the letter i.e my client on 27/06/2007. The complainant has taken that date as service date to accused. And they have filed the complaint on 19th July 2007. My Question is of premature complaint
Here in the present case, the complainant have wrongly taken the intimation date from postal authority to collect the letter by my client as the date of service of the notice. Which cannot be assumed to be date of service
As the postal authority have to wait for 7 days from the intimation & if the recipient does not collect or is not able to receive the letter then it is returned to sender with endorsement of non service. Therefore it is the date of endorsement of non service which has to be counted as deemed service not the intimation date by the postal authority to recipient to collect the Letter.
Therefore , in my point of view the same is premature & infracturous complaint. Kindly guide me whteher I am correct. Kindly provide me with the citations of premature complaint.
Further they have not annexed the loan papers
Joydip Mukherjee
23 June 2008 at 23:48
Whether subsequent notice for demand is admissible? First notice served duly to the accused, but the complainant failed to file the complaint,then the complt. once again presented the cheque within validity period and that also returned with remark"insufficient funds"then he further issued another notice of Demand to the accused which was not claimed.Is it maintainable to take cognizance by ld.court?
Sanjit
23 June 2008 at 19:38
How does the traffic police decide on what section one has to be penalized for an offence and is there any way if this section can be changed later on?
anil
23 June 2008 at 12:50
when i am going into streets some persons making absurdity & annoyed words to caused for insults of me & making hooding & open cries.
so pls tell me what type of action i
have taken against them .
anil
23 June 2008 at 12:20
wheather sectios 304-B is a culpabale homicide or consecutive homicide
kumar sachin
23 June 2008 at 01:10
some one told me tht there is a ruling of the apex court saying tht the statements made by the accused prior to framing of charge is not relevant in the eyes of law.....
BUT i didnt remember the reference of tht.
so please reply that.,
1. is it true?
2. if yes, can any body gives me the reference of that.
vinod bansal
22 June 2008 at 22:35
Sir
Plz let me know under which section of ipc Attempt to kidnaping of s minor girl is covered.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Case u/s. 138 cases
X Ltd. has issued a cheque of Rs. 5.00 Lacs in favour of Y Ltd. During the course X Ltd. has paid Rs. 3.00 Lacs to Y Ltd. To recover balance amount of Rs. 2.00 Lacs Y Ltd. has deposited Cheque of Rs. 5.00 Lacs for clearance through its banker, cheque returned unpaid with remarks of STOP PAYMENT. Y Ltd. sent a legal notice to X Ltd. demanding dishonoured cheque amount and file a case u/s. 138 NI Act after expiry of notice period time. After filing of case X Ltd. given payment of Rs. 1.50 Lacs to Y ltd. Can Y Ltd. pursue the case for balance recovery.