Ladhu Ram Chowdhary
27 June 2009 at 17:47
Criminal complaint alongwith application u/s. 156(3)-Conclusion of magistrate that police inquiry was not requried in this case -He directed to complainant for examination of himself and his witnesses -whether any illegality committed ?
Member (Account Deleted)
27 June 2009 at 16:04
Can someone furnish me the following citation (ENTIRE JUDGEMENT)
2007(2)MLJ(Cri) 1907 Mad Ramasamy & others V/s State represented by Deputy Superintendent of Police CCIW(gd) CUDDALORE
Unnikrishnan
27 June 2009 at 15:01
Dear Members,
I understand that when an agreement/document is executed outside India for which the stamp duty needs to be paid as per Indian Law, the stamp duty in respect of that document is paid after the document comes to India. In the aforesaid cases, the buying of stamp paper as a method of stamp duty is not adopted.
In this regard, I would like to have your valued views/opinion as to the following:
Does the Indian Stamp Act or any of the State Stamp Laws prohibit taking out of stamp paper outside India?
Is there any prohibition providing that agreement executed outside India cannot be on a stamp paper bought before the date of execution?
Thanking you in advance.
Warm Regards,
CS Unnikrishnan Venugopalan
Dhanesh
27 June 2009 at 14:56
Respected Sir/Madam,
I have signed a irrevocable Power of Attorney, which mentioned that I cannot proceed with the sale of the concerning immovable property (located in Mumbai), without the consent of the agent.
However, no other interest of agent was mentioned. Power of attorney is neither signed by any witness nor registered.
Now, even though I want to settle the dispute, the agent is not willing to give his consent.
Can I settle the property issue without agent's consent ? Can I cancel the POA ? Can the agent file case against me, if I settle the dispute without his consent?
I am confused, Please Help!
Thank you.
prakash bajpai
27 June 2009 at 12:14
Dear friends,
I am staying in an apartment complex. There was some problem with a neighbour related to gossiping about myself and wife with other neighbours in the complex. After a show off discussion our families stopped interacting in any way. Now the said neighbour has apparently engaged a lawyer and this lawyer has sent a legal notice claiming that we are mentally torturing and harassing them. We should stop doing this otherwise a police complaint shall be filed. The lawyer seems of very low capability as the letter is so full of errors that one can hardly understand what is meant to be conveyed. There is nothing specific mentioned in the letter by way of date or incidents.even the spelling of the name is wrong.
What is suggested course of action? Should I respond at all?
if Yes how a) by myself or b) through a lawyer?
Nehal
27 June 2009 at 12:12
Dear Sir
Is there any limitation on using brackets in a name of a company to be incorporated in India?
Regards
Nehal
Buvaneswari
27 June 2009 at 11:37
Sir..a govt employee (54yrs) died due to sickness, leaving his wife, two unmarried sons and a married daughter. legal heir certificate given by tahsildhar is carrying these 4 people names. Before death, he got jewel loan in IOB (pledged his wife's gold jewels). Now, that family wants to redeem the jewels by paying the o/s loan amt. but the manager asks them to add deceased man's mother's name in legal heir certificate. But their ration card doesnt have his mother's name as she lived seperately with her husband. Is it must to add his mother's name in legal heir certificate?
archana shah
27 June 2009 at 11:31
hi
can any one provid me the format of agreement for conversion of proprietory firm to private limited company
thanks
Mohamed Ali
27 June 2009 at 07:23
A muslim partition suite is preliminary decreed in the year 1954, the final decree proceedings is still pending and ajouned yasterday for next month, which had started in the year 1986,
All the decree holders and even many of their children and grandchildren have died, many of the legal heirs of decree holders have to brought on record and some of the legal heirs of a decree holder(plaintiff) who are not entitle for share as per Mohammedan law have wrongly been added as legal heirs of one plaintiff t the start of final decree proceedings.
Question: Now the Judge is suddenly taken a U turn and is telling, all of the legal heirs write a memo stating that pass on the final decree as per preliminary decree dated 1954 and he will passed an order, ignoring almost 80 Interlocutary application pending from the year 1986 in the pending final decree proceedings, in which some application to delete some wrongly added legal heirs of one of the plaintiff is also their and some subsequent purchaser after decree have been added as additional defendants and rest many of the application is to bring legal heirs of decree holders on record. our advocate questioned the judge he cannot pass an order based on preliminary decree as all of the decree holders have long died now but the judge is not willing to listen our advocate, our advocate said final decree proceedings is nothing but continuation of original suite and anything can be done here, or advocate further said we have an Interlocutory application pending in this FDP to delete some legal heirs of one plaintiff who are not entitle for share and have been wrongly made as parties, but the judge is saying that u can take care of that after the share is allotted to that plaintiff as per decree,but that plaintiff has died in 1979 and even her children except one daughter have died. But the judge is not understanding the things, Please advice how to proceed as we want the legal heirs of plaintiff who are not entitle for share must be removed from record in the pending final decree proceedings itself, further the judge is telling u can raise your concern in execution after final decree is passed which is wrong, can we go to high court on that memo which judge is taking to pass final decree based on preliminary decree and stop the judge from doing so, or what alternatives are there for us.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
sec.378(i) &(iii)cr p c
sec.378(i)&(iii)(After Amendment of Year 2005)-order of acquittal passed by a magistrate in a cognizable and non-bailable offence -Appeal against by complainant in sessions court lie or not ?