Adv B.B.Gambhir #9814820602
18 June 2018 at 22:17
i moved an application in civil suit for withdraw of suit with liberty to file fresh suit and also suffered the statement in the court. but the court passed the following order
"in view of statement of the plaintiff and application, the suit is hereby dismissed as withdrawn"
then i filed fresh suit on same cause of action. the opposite party raised the objection that the specific order regarding liberty to file fresh suit has not been passed.
whether silence of the court amount to grant of liberty or not. what are your views if negative then what should i do now if positive then cite some law.
Adv B.B.Gambhir #9814820602
26 March 2018 at 22:16
what is the provision to get divorce in christian law.
Adv B.B.Gambhir #9814820602
13 March 2017 at 20:22
an application under order 6 rule 17 cpc dismissed by trial court. the opposite party did not go in writ before hon'ble high court and later on the suit of the opposite party also dismissed. the opposite party filed appeal and application under order 6 rule 17 cpc by mentioning similar grounds.
under which law, the said application is maintainable?
Adv B.B.Gambhir #9814820602
28 October 2015 at 20:48
chet singh is landlord Kultar singh is tenant. i am from the side of landlord cum plaintiff.kultar singh has taken one room for office but bathroom, verrandah, kitchen and latrine and stairs are commonly used by chet singh and kultar singh. but kultar singh had alone started using the common portion without allowing chet singh to use so chet singh filed a suit for grant of permanent injunction against Kultar singh restraining the defendant from using common bathroom, open verrandah, stair case kitchen etc. in this case court decided the application under order 39 rule 1 and 2 allowed and directed kultar singh to put a common lock on the common property so that both the parties can use it commonly but kultar singh has not complied the same so far. contempt proceedings are pending.civil suit for permanent injunction is also pending for evidence.
my question is how chet singh can comply the interim order so passed by trial court while passing the application under order 39 rule 1 and 2.
Adv B.B.Gambhir #9814820602
05 October 2015 at 21:14
Anu Bala filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the sale deed dated 15.01.2010 is null and void being without consideration and act of fraud and withou delivery of possession against Sukhdev Singh and for grant for permanent injunction restraining the defendant i.e. Sukhdev Singh from dispossessing and interfering in the possession of the plaintiff. In this case we are from defendant side and took the plea that we are in possession on the basis of sale deed. the said suit was partly dismissed in the year 2012 whereby the issue regarding injunction was allowed on the basis of non delivery of possession. Sukhdev Singh filed the appeal and the same was also dismissed. Anu Bala never filed any appeal. Now Sukhdev Singh wants to take the possession of the suit property how can he claim. Actually Sukhdev Singh never remained in possession.
Adv B.B.Gambhir #9814820602
08 September 2015 at 23:19
a minor hit a bike with my client prakashvati. FIR WAS registered and thereafter the same was cancelled and DDR was registered as the driver of the offending vehicle was minor.
Parkash wati filed claim petition agaisnt Karan and his father being next friend and guardian. Now after completion of evidence of both the parties, it has come into knowledge that the true owner of the vehicle was elder brother of Karan who has not impleaded as party. Now what should i do. wheter i should continue as such or any other option...
Adv B.B.Gambhir #9814820602
23 August 2015 at 09:58
Charanjit singh filed a suit for declaration that my father Natha singh is missing from 10 years and he presumed dead against brothers mother sister of natha Singh and further claimed share being coparcener Now at the stage natha Singh appeared and submitted his affidavit and other proofs of living. What should I do now how can I claim the share in property
Adv B.B.Gambhir #9814820602
12 July 2015 at 20:49
varinder kaur filed a eviction petition against harvinder singh. that petition decreed on merits and court directed to vacate the possession. appeal filed by harvinder singh dismmissed. revision against the saidd order is pennding before honble high court but no stay order has been passed. varinder kaur filed execution the same has been adjourned from 23.05.2015 to 14.07.2015 in that execution, Harvinder Singh was proceeded exparte so warrant of possession were issued. Harvinder singh appeared on 30.05.2015 betweeen (23.05.2015-14.07.2015) moved the application for setting aside exparte order but the same has been dismissed by thhe court on same day i.e. 30.05.2015 as per order 21 rule 22 cpc. Now what is the remedy for Harvinder singh. Can he still filed objectionns.
Adv B.B.Gambhir #9814820602
09 May 2015 at 20:32
naresh kanta filed a execution for specific performance of contract for registration of sale deed and possession against sucha singh. in that execution proceedings, sale deed executed. At the time of possession, the tanent objected and refused to deliver the possession and filed the objections in the court.
Can tanent's objections are maintainable?
what is the remedy for the decree holder in this situation.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Section 65 b of evidence act
i filed a petition under section 13 HMA from husband side on the ground of cruelty and desertion in the year 2014. The cross examination of petitioner is conducted. the case is fixed for remaining evidence of the petitioner. Now i came to know that the petitioner is having some voice recording of respondent which can be helpful in my case. i could not find the procedure to prove those voice recording.
give me suggestions to prove voice recording as per section 65-B of Indian Evidence act.
Whether i should move application for amendment of proceedings then move the application for leading evidence under section 65-B or i should seek the permission to lead additional evidence of the petitioner or any other mode. please suggest.