pradeep kumar lalwani
10 September 2009 at 21:01
After 2 years of operation ,A lady become pregnant again . Any rulling in favour of lady in consumer protection Act.riven
kotaruraghu
10 September 2009 at 21:00
sir,
my grand father gave a shop for without any written agreement since 30 years.for rs.400 but till date there is no written agreement but he was not paying rent for 2 years. is there any relief for meriven
Tipsy
10 September 2009 at 20:37
Can you please give Format of Indemnity Bond M20 to be filed by the mg.committee with Registrar of society on stamp paper of Rs 200/-
what is the detailed procedure that the commitee is required to adopt in the event of any such delayed execution of indemnity bond by the managing committee members of any housing society and also for the regulations on exemptions/condonation of delay if any available to individual societies.
riven
arvind mahajan
10 September 2009 at 19:28
r the courses offered by Law wave, rainmaker & legal 2 legal etc really worth considering for securing a job in LPO or ...?riven
sanjaygarg796@gmail.com
10 September 2009 at 19:13
Sir,
In the year 2005 a criminal complaint was filed under PNDT Act against the dealer who sold out one Ultra sound Machine to a person on the basis of documents produced by that doctor in which he claimed that he had already applied for registraton and also appointed a Competent Doctor. later on it was found that the person who purchased the Machine not a doctor and he obtained the machine on the basis of forged documet. A criminal complaint was filed by the CMo against the doctor as well as sellor of the machine . But on the day of filling of complaint there was no notification in his favour. whether complaint is maintainable?riven
Rajneesh Madhok
10 September 2009 at 18:20
DOWRY HARASSMENT CASE, BOY’S PARENTS REGISTERED FAKE CASE IN WOMEN CELL THAT HIS SON HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED.
My bhanji got married with a boy last year. The marriage had been solemnized at a town of Haryana in a marriage palace. The girl had been living in Australia on Student visa. As she had completed her studies; at that time of marriage she was on the student visa. She sponsored her groom after marriage to Australia on Dependent visa. The boy’s family belong to Punjab.
After a week of marriage the girl went back to Australia and the boy joined her after about six months. On joining in Australia the girl revealed the hard fact that the boy is impotent to her mother. In the mean time as she had knowledge of his password she read the e-mails sent by her husband to his parents in which he confessed that he is impotent and is unable to perform.
In addition to it the boy had been torturing the girl physically and mentally. As he had not been doing anything in Australia and totally dependent on the girl. He had been torturing her to pay him money, arrange money from his parents to settle him in Australia in business. On the continuous torture one day when he tortured her a lot she called the police in Australia and narrated all the incidents that he has broken the cupboards and crockery and all that.. The police instructed the boy to leave the place and live separately till you have visa. At that time he had having about a month’s visa to stay in Australia.
To settle the dispute with mutual understanding, both sides of people belong to girl and boy’s in a meeting decided and the decision had been noted on Rs 100 non judicial paper that the boy’s family will pay this much amount of Rupees and all the jewellery which is in the possession of boy’s family will be handed over to the girls’ family and the boy will come to India and will file a divorce application in the court and the matter will be sorted out with mutual understanding. The date has been fixed, that up till the date within two months the boy will come and file the divorce case.
After two months the boy’s family turned from its promise. They said that we have no money to pay. Secondly the boy says that it is my own life’s matter who are you to decide on my matter. Thirdly they said that the boy will not come to India. Now whatever you like to do you can.
On this reaction. The girls’ family lodged the complaint with Police. The Women Cell police had been deputed for investigation. The boy’s mother and father visited the place and admitted and submitted the E-mails sent to them by the boy. In the E-mail it was also mentioned that the girl don’t give him much time to perform so I am unable and the parents confessed that the matter had been decided in the meeting held by both sides persons (Panchayat).
Now the boy’s parents has lodged complaint on girls’ parents that his son has been kidnapped by them and they have stolen the password of his son.
The girls’ side has lodged complaint under 498A against the boy’s family but till date no arrest has been made so far.
Kindly suggest solution.
riven
Soma
10 September 2009 at 18:13
in a injunction petition U/s 151 CPC the plaintiff claimed that the defendant is creating nuisance and disturbance...he got an status quo exparte order...the actual fact is opposite....earlier prior to this suit the defendant filed a 144 CrPC and police report was favourable to him...can that police report be shown as an evidence (annxture with the objection)for to show that claim of plaintiff is false in this civil case?riven
kalyani choudhury
10 September 2009 at 16:59
I have a SLP going on in The Supreme court. The AOR is getting the official reports but I am not able to get them from him since this AOR was approached by my previous lawyer who was dismissed by me. Can anyone tell me the website address from where I can get the details of my case including the next date of hearing.riven
Shivasurya
10 September 2009 at 16:58
on 12-06-2002, the complainant trust entered a Memorandum of Understanding with one Ltd company, for becoming a franchisee of the said company. And as per the Memorandum of Understanding, the said company provided computers, 10 KVA UPS, Laser printers, Dot Matrix printers and net working products totally worth about Rs.12,00,000/- as fee for establishing College Network Lab to the complainant trust on receipt of Rs.12,00,000/- from the complainant trust for conducting Networking course to the college students of engineering college at the college campus. And according to the Memorandum of Understanding the complainant trust acted as franchisee of the said company for one year. At the time of entering the Memorandum of Understanding with complainant trust; the accused is not director of the company and only in the year 2003, he became one of the director of the said company and he is unaware about the Memorandum of Understanding entered between the complainant trust and the company.
He came to know about the Memorandum of Understanding entered between the complainant trust only in the year 2004 while seeing a copy of legal notice dated 27-01-2003, sent to the company and its erstwhile 4 directors when cleaning the office of company and he simply ignored it as it was not addressed to him. And in the month of March 2004, the secretary of the complainant trust, came to the office and informed that the company has liable to refund the balance franchisee fee of Rs.3,00,000/- out of Rs.12,00,000/- which was received by the company for giving franchisee to the complainant trust. And as the present director of the company he has to give the said amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. As he unaware about the Memorandum of Understanding entered between the complainant trust and the company, he requested the complainant to give time for verify the records for his claim regarding the MOU and assured him if the company has to repay any amount towards any liability to the complainant trust. But the complainant trust insisted him to give a cheque for Rs.3,00,000/- and promised him that he will return the said cheque, if the accused established that the company has no liability to the complainant trust in respect of the MOU. After perusal of records, the accused knew that the company is not liable to pay anything to the complainant trust and immediately sent a letter to the trust demanding return of the cheque, but the complainant trust presented the cheque and after dishonor filed case u/s.138 NI Act, only against the accused and in the complaint the complainant trust has not added the company and other directors as accused in that case. The accused is facing the trial. I need suitable citations to protect the innocent accused in that case
riven
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Essential commodities Act bailable or nonb-bailable
R/Members
Plz tell me Essential commodities Act is bailable or nonb-bailable in Haryana presently as i have heard now as per latest amendment it is bailable now.Thanxriven