bhagwant
02 August 2008 at 18:04
When there is accident between motor cycle and truck, and if motorcyclist get injured and admitted directly to hospital or left from the place, and if truck driver files complaint against motorcyclist u/s.279 IPC 184 MV Act, even after having negligence on his part. It is reveled after investigation that motor cyclist was not wrong, what will be effect on the complaint, who complaint will dispose off, whether chargsheet against truck driver can be filed.
Balaram
02 August 2008 at 14:26
Dear Experts,
I have doubt. Till now in my experience we are considering 30 / 31 / 28 days as the basis for salary computation. Where as the actual wage should be 26 days only. even we calculate gratuity for 26 base only.
then my doubt is that while calculating..the lop and net salary which method should be followed and any rule / act to refer as under:
1. Earned Salary = Actual Gross / No. of total days in a month * Actual working days.
or
2. Earned Salary = Actual Gross / 26 * Actual Working Days.
which is the correct Method ? I have been asked by the management that when we are paying for 26 days (gratuity), why cannot we calculate for 26 days for payroll also instead of 30 / 31 days ...?
please clafify.
balaram
rvbs2@yahoo.com
BHUPINDER SINGH
02 August 2008 at 13:44
Can we claim for lottery draw if we won in india.
bhagwant
02 August 2008 at 12:25
It is observed that Sec.427 is applied with Sec.279 IPC in Motor Vehcile accident Casses. My query is that for the purpose of mischief intention is necessary, and there is no intention to cause damage in Motor Vehicle Accidents, then how 427 is applicable with 279. Do any body have views from Apex Court, please send me.
Ladhu Ram Chowdhary
02 August 2008 at 07:19
case fixed for judgment and from the evidence Magistrate found that offence u/s 397 I.P.C.appears to made outand it is triable by only court of session -Magistrate is emprowered u/s .323 to exercise the power before signing the judgment ?
Ladhu Ram Chowdhary
02 August 2008 at 07:04
Whether recourse of provisions contained in sec.91 available to investigation officer ?
rohit jaiswal
02 August 2008 at 02:04
who is expert according to cort who can detrmine those technical matters from which court is not familier?
plz give aany case of supreme court.
example:-
who will determine that deploma in architecture and in interior decoration with 10 years experience in architecture service are whether equivallent or not ?
if u have any citation then plzzzzz cite it.example is a real case problem
Vijay Kumar
02 August 2008 at 00:24
If an advocate intimates the court in writing regarding the death of one of his clients in compliance of Order XXII Rule 10A of CPC, whether he is required to pay court fee under Court Fee Act or any other law?
It happened with me today. I affixed the court fee but I want to satisfy my academic curiosity.
Vivek Shukla
01 August 2008 at 19:48
1996 (1) Maharashtra Law Journal is a Division Bench Authoirity K Ramaswami and J.B. Patnaik, JJ and it is held that the provisions of limitation act are not applicable and the reference has to filed to the collector within 42 days. therefore after 1996 the delay is not condoned in Maharashtra. if there is any authority after 1996 of Supereme Court saying that the delay can be condoned under the Land Acquisiton Act for filing reference ? Pls send us the lattest authorities of Supreme Court alongwith the full text.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Auto DEbit of bank
Person A has obtained personal loan from a bank and signed the document to deduct the loan amount from the salary thro auto debit. the salary is credited in X bank where he has obtained personal loan. In the mean time before the loan tenure(48 months) he has decided to retire voluntarily.(Still 38 months of loan tenure is existing at the time of retirement) the loan amount is still pending to clear. the auto debit thro salary is stopped automatically because the salary is not credited in his account because of his retirement..In the Mean time A has obtained a portion of i.e.,10% retirement benefits which was credited in the same account. The bank manager without getting consent letter from the loanee using the auto debit tecniques deducted the entire loan amount from his account.(foreclousure). The problem is the consumer or loanee is not willing allow the entire foreclosure because he neither get his salary nor get his pension till the entire pension proposal verification process ends.To run his family 10% portion of amount of retirement benefits was given by the h.Q. it was deducted by the bank autodebit for the loan amount foreclosure. 90% of the pending benefits still has to come. the entire 10% of benefits is debited from his S.B account. Now the customer is now the customer not able to and mentaaly depressed.
Is there any violation of consumer protection prevails? the affected person wish to contact consumer court for the damaging his mental upset. Expers are invited to comment.