Dear Friends,
IF SIGNED BY THE ACCUSED KNOWINGLY OR UN-KNOWINGLY ON THE ORDER. COMPLAINANT TAKING UNDUE ADVANTAGE OF THE SECOND CONDITION OF IMPRISONMENT AFTER COMPLYING THE PAYMENT OF 50 THOUSAND ON THE SPOT IN THE COURT AND ALSO FILIED A PETITION IN THE SAME COURT FOR EXECUTING THE SECOND PART OF THE AWARD. CAN THE COMPLAINANT FILE AGAIN ON THE SAME ORDER EXECUTION ONCE THE AMOUNT IS RECEIVED BY HIM AS PER THE AWARD. EXCEPT IMPRISONMENT IS NOT ALLOWED BY THE JUDGE. CAN THE COMPLAINANT ASK THE SAME JUDGE TO REVIEW HIS OWN ORDER & IMPLEMENT THE SECOND PART OF AWARD IMPLEENTATION.
IS THE COMPLAINANT PETITION CAN BE MAINTAINABLE IN THE SAME COURT BEFORE THE SAME JUDGE???
LOKADALAT s ARE CREATED TO SERVE NOT TO PUNISH IF THIS APPLIES THEN WHY THE PUNISHMENT PROVISON COMING IN TO THE PICTURE FOR A FINANCE COMPANY IN THIS CASE.
KINDLY GUIDE ME WHAT TO DO & HOW TO AVOID THE SECOND ART BECOZ THE ACCUSED IS A GOVERNMENT SERVANT & HER ENTIRE FAMILY COMES ON ROADS IF IMPLEMENTED. IS
THIS IS THE MOTTO OF LOKADALAT??
THE COMPLAINANT DEMANDING NOW TO PAY 1 LAC TO WITH DRAW THE CASE ELSE HE SEE THAT THE SECOND PART (IMPRISONMENT) WILL BE EXECUTED.
IS THIS LOKADALAT USE it is SHOWING FAVOUR TO COMPANY ONLY BY ALLOWING DOUBLE JEOPARDY AWARD?
.
