RAJAN
28 September 2008 at 14:24
An officer in a company made a fraud in company after his enquiry he has dismiss from the services.
He raise dispute under 2-A in Labour Office,for reinstatement and cont.with back wages.we have filed an application to discharge his application because ,he was working in the capacity of officer,(nature of job and his authority while working )and no right to raise dispute and also drawing more than Rs.10,000/- salary pm.
Can Labour office discharge his application.
Also would like to have some case law on the same issue, similar to this.
mastanrao.bhogadi
28 September 2008 at 14:21
Sir,
a decree passed by small cause court can be transferred to regular side for attachment of immovable property in view of amendment to Sec42 of c.p.c.
RAJAN
28 September 2008 at 14:14
with the recent changes in payment of Gratuity Act,whether Teacher is workman under the payment of Gratuity Act.
salilkumarp
28 September 2008 at 12:58
SIRS,
TWO PERSONS STOOD AS SURETY FOR AN ACCSUED, PRODUCING THEIR LAND TAXPAID RECEIPT , ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN ISSUED BY CONCERNED VILLAGE OFFICER.
BUT ON VERIFICATION, MAGISTRATE CAME TO KNOW THAT SURETIES ARE FAKE....THEY HAVE NO LANDED PROPERTIES....TAX PAID RECEIPT
IS A FORGED DOCUMENT.SO, MAGISTRATE TOOK CAse u/s 463 471 475 ipc by handing over acomplaint to police u/s 190 crpc.
now the same court is trying the matter and magistrate himself was examined as pw1
......fortunately he was transfered by that time ! is it an illegality ?
what is 340 crpc and 195 crpc ?
non--transfering of case to another court will vitiate the trail?
any citations ?
amit kumar choubey
28 September 2008 at 12:55
Respected all seniors,
I want to know about the compliances issues/concerns related to information security within the organization.
Second, about data protection law and law related to information security.
Pls provide input related to above as soon as possible.
With Regards,
Amit Choubey
salilkumarp
28 September 2008 at 12:43
SIRS,
WII YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN { IN BRIEF} SEC 42 AND SEC 50 OF NDPS.
WHETHER IT IS APPLICABLE TO CASUAL SEARCH( NO PRIOR INFORMATION)? IS THERE ANY
DIFFERANCE OF APPLICABILITY OF THESE SEC.S IN CASE OF SEIZURE FROM BODY OF A PERSON AND SEIZURE FROM SUIT CASE/CARRY-BAG WHICH THE ACCUSED WAS HOLDING.?
WHETHER NON-COMPLIANCE OF THESE SEC.S WILL VITIATE THE ENTIRE TRAIL / IS ONLY A CURABLE IRREGULARITY ?
PLS GIVE RECENT SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
Dilip srivastav
28 September 2008 at 12:38
IS cri revision (sec.397crpc) not lie against summoning order in complaint case?
salilkumarp
28 September 2008 at 12:30
sirs,
as everybody knows, anticipatory bail can be moved only in cases where the offences are non-bailable and there is apprehension of arrest.
here, in a 138 ni act case,accused failed to appear before the court on receipt of summons ,long back in 2006.now warrant is pending against the accused and 82 83 crpc steps are already taken.now the accused wants to surrender before the court.but,on , that when an accused is surrendeing in a LPC case ,even if it be in minor offence like 138 case, there is every chance o f court remanding him to judicial custody at least for one day.
to avoid this, accused wishes to file an anticipatory bail application in district court.
here my doubt is:
whether an accused can file an anticipatory bail application in a 138 ni case (bailable offence)in which non-bailable warrant is pendiding and accused is apprehending arrest ?
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
issue regardng franchisee
Problem;
-Dispute b/w the franchiser (a reputed telecom co.) & franchisee
- I am from the franchisee side
-Points;
-Existing agreement valid till 2010.
-Company is pursuing the franchisee to sign a new agreement.
-Franchisee apprehension is that by the new agreement and norms there payouts (commission) might decrease drastically.
-Issues;
-The co. without any bilateral agreements has started payments as per the new proposed agreement. Without holding any meeting or listening to the franchisee i.e. very much acting in a monopolistic way (hence franchisee apprehension were true).
-Steps Taken Till date;
- The franchisees (7 in no.) have jointly served legal notice to the co. in reply to which they send a very casual and general reply wherein they have falsely denied the allegation prime facie.
-They have referred a certain clause of the agreement wherein they have all the rights to change any clause by giving a circular or notice. (Seems to me they are acting in a very professional manner)
-Question;
-What is the need of such bilateral agreement when there is such hidden clause which they can use as a tool to serve there own interest at any pt. of time?
-Relief;
-My arrears
-My earlier blocked payments with interest.
-Last but not the least if at any time they want that they are not willing to work with me they can terminate the deed by giving me my all the arrears along with my guarantee money. As there is no future with such co. who has no work culture and professional ethics.
-Any suggestions where to sought relief from either MRTP,TRAI,WRIT,or Simply Dist Court? And what to do after legal notice where to go please help me step by step as I am new and confused please!
Regard
Apurva-Kr
Advocate,Patna High Court.