Anonymous
03 November 2009 at 09:42
Dear Sir,
Thanks for your reply.We submitted the citation given by Mr Manohar and our lawyer also argued on the same.But the judge was not convinced and said that as per the latest SC judgment no lower court has the right to waive of statuatory period.However the judge( in My case)reserved the judgment next week.
I do not understand the SC judgement.When we have mutually agreed to terminate our marriage and the court not waiving of statuatory period,both the parties have to undergo a lot of mental presuure inspite of them not able to reconciliiate and they cannot decide on their future life also.
My point is can't anyone challenge the judgement??
Also i want to know if statautory period is granted do i have to pay maintanence to my wife???
Anonymous
03 November 2009 at 09:31
In DVC case what procedure is to be followed in the court. Civil or Criminal?
Is there a possiblility to pray for amendment of complaint for inclusion of any oversighted omission when criminal procedure is to be followed?
Anonymous
03 November 2009 at 06:41
i have joined as a dnb student in radio-diagnosis after completing my MBBS.i have various postings like x-ray,ultrasound,ct scan and mri.my query is i have finished my 7months of scheduled ct scan posting, but,iam hardly for 3months in ct scan,ie.,i have been posted in ultrasound mostly.now iam not in a position to report ct confindently.in what way can i sue or claim the concerned for professional misuse or whatever.please respond tothis at an earlier .
thank u
pkpworld..
03 November 2009 at 06:39
I have come through a case law from experty forum on the subject 234A. From that I come to know about case lawCIT Vs.Dr.Pranoy Roy (2009) 309 ITR 231 (SC).
How can I get this case law of income tax.
Anonymous
03 November 2009 at 04:06
Some in my family bought shares in my name in 1965.The value of those shares purchased for about Rs.1000/ has gone into lakhs.He has availed the dividends on shares for almost almost 30 years. Can I ask for those shares which are in my name.
Anonymous
03 November 2009 at 01:01
Dear sirs,
it is to draw your kind attention toward my query that a person died leaving a registered will,as in that will he has given the whole share to his two sons and exluding her three daughters,
Now my point is that is there is way for daughters to get equal share from their father's property.
yogesh
03 November 2009 at 00:31
Dear Experts,
Kindly please inform whether supporting affidavit is essential while filing written submissions before the Court
Regards
kishor
02 November 2009 at 23:27
Namskar
I have purchased a Flat at Ghatkopar.hingwala lane Pantnagar.east.mum 400075. This society was redevelop.Devlopers M/S Bhavanji Khimji & Co.Who repaird (devlop)up to 4th Floor and Constructed three floors (5th to 7th). Developer has given possession on 01.06.2008 to new members (from 5th to 7th floors)
.
Last Two years Society was not Given Share Certificate on Flat holder Name.
New Flat Holders paying maintenance charges Rs1000/-Per months & society is not giving any Receipt against payment.
We requested society number of times, but society is not giving receipt and also not giving us membership of society & share certificate.
There is the dispute between Developer & Managing Committee. My neighbor is an old age family. They are suffering Water supply & Lift problem. Also new members on 5th to 7th floor.
Society always demand to bring O.C (occupation certificate) from Developers and Developers demands us to the issuance of O.C. is kept pending for the concernend members are required to remove the grills, projections and window on dead walls. There is no delay or lapse on our part and for violation of rule and consequent delay the society has to think its members.
Some new members paid maintenance. Every month. Other new members not paid maintenance because he want receipts. Societies say you are not members and staying illegally.
Developers said to new flat holder if society gives to u membership I will give transfer fee to society.
Now Mahanagar gas lying gas pipe lines in society but society given NOC upto 4th floor for old members for gas connection. New members also demanding gas pipeline, but society say New members are staying illegally.
So kindly guide us this matter. And solved our new members problem.
Thanking you
Yours Faithfully,
New member.
Anonymous
02 November 2009 at 20:15
Property is in the name of the mother. The size of the plot is 75 feet x 70 feet. She has 3 sons only. The eldest son occupied the property first from 1983 to till date and took access to 60% of the ground place with house on it. He has never paid rent to my mother, but shown bogus entries of rent paid in his businees accounts. Now he is claiming tenancy rights. The mother is interest in giving all equal share of 25 feet x 70 feet. But the eldest son does not listen to the mother and others are deprived of the share, as he is reluctant to vacant.
Can he claim tenancy rights ? Please advise
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Consumer Protection Act 1986
Dear Members,
An article posted by Mombi Grahak Panchayat blog that is given below is worth a reading by all members of the club. I am sure many of you will join hands with Mombai Grahak Panchayth in making a review petition in Supreme Court.
R.Thyagarajan.
Consumer Protection Act is in need of Protection
B.S.N.L.Calicut had, in August 2001 disconnected the telephone of one Mr. Krishnan due to non-payment of a bill of Rs. 17103/-.Mr. Krishnan pursued his grievance about the bill with B.S.N.L. but was unsuccessful. He filed a complaint before the District Forum (D.F.) Calicut.The latter by its order dt. 16-11-2001 directed B.S.N.L. to restore the connection and pay the complainant Rs. 5000/- towards compensation along with 12% interest.B.S.N.L. then moved the Kerala High Cour (H.C.) - A single Bench of the H.C. dismissed B.S.N.L.'s Plea and directed it to approach the Kerala state consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. (C.D.R.C.) Failing to be 'educated' by this rebuff, the B.S.N.L. appealed before a Division Bench of the Kerala H.C. The latter referred the appeal to a full Bench. The Bench dismissed the petitions on 14-02-2003. B.S.N.L.then moved the Hon. Supreme Court (S.C.) and challenged the judgement of the Kerala H.C. The S.C. Bench. comprising of Hon. justice Markandey Katju and Hon. Justice A. K. Ganguly allowed the appeal. They observed that there is a remedy prescribed US 7 B of the Indian Telegraph Act. of 1885 for resolution of all disputes regarding Telecommunication, through arbitration.
Since the Telegraph Act is a special law, its provisions would prevail over a general law likeConsumer Protection Act (C.P.A.) - "It is setteled law that general law must yield to special Law. The remedy under the C.P.A. is barred by implication" they held. This, in effect, will take away the jurisdication of the consumer Fora to entertain disputes relating to telecom services. With due respect to the judges, one cannothelp observing that the judgement shows lack of application of judicial mind. In the first place, thereis no reference whatsoerer to the relevant From the Consumer Courts Consumer Protection Act is in need of Protection A more serious implication is that if the logic of the judgement is to be stretched further, all
services including professional services for which special legislation is available, eg Airlines,Railways, Insurance,Banking, medicine, Law etc.will be out of the
jurisdiction of the C.P.A.This will defeat the whole purpose of creating a special
legislation for a single window system for speedy,simple and inexpensive redressal of consumer grievances.provisions/clauses of the C.P.A. whose jurisdiction it has set to define. The definition of service states "service of any description which is made availableto potential (users and includes, but not limited to,the provision of )facilities in connection with banking...., but does not include the rendering of any service free of change or under a contract of personal service. Telephone service does notqualify for either of the exceptions to the definition of a service. No where is it indicated that services which are ruled by a special legislation will be exempted from C.P.A.On the other hand, clause 3 of C.P.A. clearly states that "the provisions of this Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force." This should clear any doubts about the applicabitily of C.P.A. in case of services for which special legislation is in force.Surprisingly, the judgement completely ignores and infact,
contradicts two earlier judgements of the Hon. S.C. viz. i) Fair Air Engineers VS. N. K. Modi and ii) Secretary,Thirumrugan Co.op. Agriculchral Credit Society Vs. M. Lalitha. In both of these judgements, the Hon. S.C. has held that above mentioned sec.3 of the C.P.A. imparts jurisdiction to the consumer Fora even in those cases where special Acts are in force. To quote from the judgements. "The Act (C.P.A.) intends to relieve the consumers of the cumbersome arbitration proceedings or civil action. ......... The Act creates a framework for speedy disposal of comsumer
disputes and an attempt has been made to remove the existing evils of the ordinery court system... The Act being a beneficial legislation should receive a Liberal construction." On the other hand, the Hon. judges have relied on an earlier Judgement of the S.C. Viz Chairman, Thiruvallurar Transport Corp. VS. Consumer Protection Council, which is far from relevant in the instant case. The judgement is not only controversial and illconceived but its implications are disastrous . The
immediate effect of the order will be that all complaints regarding telephone services pending before the Consumer Fora throughout the country will be dismissed. The complainants will have to file them afresh before the arbitrators appointed by the Govt. Telephone service providers on their part will not only keep compliance of the orders of the fora on hold, but also apply for a review of the cases already disposed off by the Fora.A more serious implication is that if the logic of the judgement is to be stretched further, all services including professional services for which special legislation is available, eg Airlines, Railways, Insurance, Banking, medicine, Law etc. will be out of the jurisdiction of the C.P.A. This will
defeat the whole purpose of creating a special legislation for a single window system for speedy,simple and inexpensive redressal of consumer grievances. This reminds me of the early 1990 s when various professional bodies and service providers tried their best to be exempted from the C.P.A. However, thanks to the efforts of the consumer organigations and judicious interpretation of the Act by the National commission and the Hon.supreme court. The jurisdiction of the C.P.A. has not only remained in tact but has actually expanded. Since the instant judgement may start a regressive trend by making inroads in the jurisdiction of the Comsumer Fora, consumer organisations in the country must take up this issue and make an unequivocal demand for a review of the judgement. M.G.P. also plans to approach the
Central Govt. (Dept.of Consumer Affairs and Dept.of Law and Judiciary) to take a lead in the matter of review of the judgement.
- Lalita Kulkarni
Ex-member Mumbai District Forum
Monday, November 2, 2009