rahul.k
04 February 2009 at 15:18
hai i am rahul now i am doing ca foundation and b.com second year for distance education i like study law course so please tell about the law course and how can i join any distance education system avaliable
Mohamed Ali
04 February 2009 at 14:59
A Sunni hanafi Family partition suit is decreed. As per decree male is entitle for 2/17th share and female is entitle for 1/17th share in the property. Decree consisted of two types of properties town properties and revenue lands.
Final decree proceedings filed in 1989 to execute the decree, the town properties were divided as per decree and part of final decree proceedings for town properties is completed in 1996,
Some LR’s of one of the plaintiff who are not entitle for share has been jointly allotted properties in town along with other heirs of plaintiff,
Now execution is pending for town properties, and other part of same final decree proceedings for revenue lands is still pending.
Now we have file and IA in pending final decree proceedings to strike out LR”s who are not entitle for share,
we also want to get back the town properties allotted in 1996 to those LR’s who are not entitle for share.
Whether we have to file a separate suit or we have to raise this issue in the pending execution or we can raise this issue in pending final decree proceedings for revenue lands.
umapandya
04 February 2009 at 14:30
The criminal case is not moving despite fast trial orders from high court.the witnesses either not coming or judge do not availlable for hearing due to workload on due hearing date. what do we do.judge himself seems to linger on the case
Kasu
04 February 2009 at 14:17
ther is a partnership firm where ther are 5 partners ratio 30:30:20:10:10
the partners having 20:10:10 share are threating to give a dispute letter in the bank.
The partner having 20% is a lady and she is partner in other Concrete industry with her husband.
the partners having 10% each are directors of a casting company which is private limited.
One of the partner having 30% STAKE in the firm is parnter in the concrete firm to help the firm in legal matter
and he is the gurantor in the cating company.
The business is being carried out by partners with 30:30 ratio and the other 3 partners are non working but they take profits and now.the partnership firm is doing good and the other 3 partners 20:10:10 are not doing good are trying to give the dispute letter. What action can be taken to avoid the letter and even if the letter is given what should be the course of action.
Thanks in advance
zindagi
04 February 2009 at 13:53
A Govt. employee workg as a pharmacist since 1974. She showed her nationality as Indian in attestation forms for verification of her character & antecedents at the time of her appointment. She was carrying the valid British passport at dat time. This fact was not disclosed by her at the time of her appointment. It came to the knowledge of Dept/office in 2007. When charge sheeted, she replied in defence that she was originally born in India 1951, migrated to Kenya in 1955 till 1965 when she was brought to India by her father. Thereafter her schooling, further education, marriage with an Indian citizen, her voter card, ration card, PAN card in India only. Therefore she considered herself as Indian citizen. Her Passport expired in 1987 which she got renewed after 19 years in 2006 valid till 2016.
Now question arose that can the dept, where she is working as pharmacist, initiate disciplinary proceedings under Punjab civil service rules( punishment & appeal ) Rules 1970 against ‘A’ for concealing the fact of holding British passport at the time of her appointment in the said dept
rohit arya garg
03 February 2009 at 23:36
in case of personal bonafide necassity...a landlord filin a ejectment petition for the need of his son who is to retire from service and during the pendency of the ejectment petition he decrees the shop in dispute in favour of this son.(only the property in dispute partitioned and other properties left undivided amongst brothers). tenant filing reply to this amended title and changed circumstances as this was done to create paucity of accomodation as the shop under tenancy was given to the retired son whereas other shop lying vacant and used by other son as godown not decreed in favour of this son(retired).
On amended title and change of ownwership during pendency of the ejectment petition, the rent controller fixed an additional issue that IS THERE A RELATION OF LANLORD AND TENANT BETWEEN THE LANDLORD(SON)AND THE TENANT.the court not deciding this issue specifically but gave a noting regards this fact in other issue.
NOW MY QUERRY IS
1.)that can the appeal be remanded back to decide this issue.?
2, )is a seperate application required for this?
3. )any recent authority on this point?
4.)can tenant dispute to this partition/family settlement.?
5. )any recent authority on this point too
6. )is partial partition permissible.
N.B.----above pertains to the east punjab/haryana rent act
sanjesh prasad
03 February 2009 at 18:46
sir/madam
what are the various registrations required for publication of book compiling of various Acts and judgements of Hon'ble Sc and HC's?
sanjesh prasad
Subodh
03 February 2009 at 18:31
While vetting an agreement for services, the following clause appeared in it which reads:
The Parties further hereby waive any right to a trial by jury with respect to any lawsuit or judicial proceeding arising or relating to this Agreement.
How far is this clause acceptable?
What is jury here? Is it applicable in India
Ranganath
03 February 2009 at 17:45
Respected attornies, I have filed a petition under 9 of HMA for brining my wife back into my house. Judge ordered counseling sessions during last hearing and she refused for re-union, hbl judge had furhter inquired both of us in his chamber and have ordered another counseling session as she refused in front of the judge too. I am working man and my job demands me to travel out of city. Can I skip next hearing. Will there be anyn reasons asked for my absence. Will my wife ask for any relief or ex-parte. I will be absent only for the next counseling session. Pls clarify
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Divorce under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
One marriage has been solemnised on 16th January, 2009 under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. After two-three days from that marriage day the bride came back to her father's house and said there is some mental mis-match between she and her hesband and she don't want to go back her marital house. The marriage is not yet been regigtered under any Act, only socal marriage has been done. she wants divorce. Now in that setuation my question is as follows:-
1) The marriage is not yet been regigtered under any Act. so is it necessery to take divorce from the Court?
2) If it is necessery then how much time she have to wait for divorce?
3) What is the procedure to make this divorce if it is not done by mutual consent?