Mangesh
11 April 2011 at 13:42
What is the meaning and difference of Interim and Final Directions of SEBI.
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 15:58
The following sections of the LA Act,1894 refer to some registrable instrument(award?):
"51. Exemption from stamp duty and fees. - No award or agreement made under this Act shall be chargeable with stamp duty, and no person claiming under any such award or agreement shall be liable to pay any fee for a copy of the same.
[51A. Acceptance of certified copy as evidence. - In any proceeding under this Act, a certified copy of a document registered under the Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), including a copy given under section 57 of that Act, may be accepted as evidence of the transaction recorded in such document]".
Do these 2 paragraphs of LA Act,1894 mean
1. That an award or agreement made under this Act is registrable but not chargeable with stamp duty.
2. Person claiming under any such award or agreement shall be liable to pay any fee for a copy of the same obtainable from the Registrar.
3. In any proceeding under this Act, a certified copy of a document registered (by the acquiring LAO/Government) under the Registration Act,1908, including a copy given by the Registrar under section 57 of that Act, may be accepted as evidence of transaction recoded in such document.
4. The two paragraphs definitely refer to the registration of an instrument/ by the LAO in the LA process. What is that document?
or what are those documents?
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 15:57
The following sections of the LA Act,1894 refer to some registrable instrument(award?):
"51. Exemption from stamp duty and fees. - No award or agreement made under this Act shall be chargeable with stamp duty, and no person claiming under any such award or agreement shall be liable to pay any fee for a copy of the same.
[51A. Acceptance of certified copy as evidence. - In any proceeding under this Act, a certified copy of a document registered under the Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), including a copy given under section 57 of that Act, may be accepted as evidence of the transaction recorded in such document]".
Do these 2 paragraphs of LA Act,1894 mean
1. That an award or agreement made under this Act is registrable but not chargeable with stamp duty.
2. Person claiming under any such award or agreement shall be liable to pay any fee for a copy of the same obtainable from the Registrar.
3. In any proceeding under this Act, a certified copy of a document registered (by the acquiring LAO/Government) under the Registration Act,1908, including a copy given by the Registrar under section 57 of that Act, may be accepted as evidence of transaction recoded in such document.
4. The two paragraphs definitely refer to the registration of an instrument/ by the LAO in the LA process. What is that document?
or what are those documents?
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 15:28
Opinion of learned experts of forum is needed. It has been experienced by a number of firearm license applicants, especially in states of Uttar Pradesh and Uttaranchal that the licensing authorities are verbally asking to purchase National Savings Certificates worth Rs. 50,000 per firearm endorsement on license. Apart from NSC, they also ask for amount towards red cross etc. If one does not comply, then practically it becomes next to impossible to obtain firearm license, since licensing authorities have practically unlimited discretionary powers under Arms Act 1959 to deny, delay or cause various kinds of hardships. It appears they are exploiting the need of self defense of people and kind of blackmailing and forcing them to comply. In my opinion, at least they are trying to circumvent Indian Arms Act 1959
CHAPTER III - PROVISIONS RELATING TO LICENCES,
14. Refusal of licences
(2) The licensing authority shall not refuse to grant any licence to any person merely on the ground that such person does not own or possess sufficient property.
Are they trying to cleverly bypass this clause by asking to deposit money(movable property) after the grant of license? What is practical solution to this problem, since nowhere their "demand" is in writing?
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 15:18
please clarify if commercial LPG can be sold against D1&D2 if so pl . clarify the category of users.Also whether the buyer can claim the input.What is the right of a regd. vat dealer to take goods against D1/D2 and what is liability of the seller if the assessing authority disallow the form D1 or D2.This is specifically for haryana state.
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 15:08
HI I'm zakir hussain lone pursuing B.A.,LL.B FROM UNIVERSITY OF KASHMIR.I want to know what are the different fields in which a law student can work besides court.in kasmir,there is political turmoil and only courts are available to us.Here the academic value is almost zero becoz the teaching faculty of k.u. law deptt.{only govt institute in valley} is already full
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 15:05
One thieft case after recovery of thieft article MM Court announced open court required superdari nama. Please send me standared superdarinama draft.
Thanks
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 14:57
can any one give me material on syndicated finance?and tell how can a co-lender come out of finance agreement?
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 14:56
iam a staff nurse in jipmer, a central government institution,puducherry. there is call for for staff nurse post in state government,puducherry. if i apply through proper channel and join in state government, whether they will give pay protection and my service will be counted? my next question is for higher studies a per law goverment servants are allowed for higher studies without pay in 3 years, in that case my service from date of joining the central government will be considered or date of joining the state government will be considered? thanks in advance .
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
RTI Act 2005
i worked as an employee with LIC and retired ecently.my employers punished me in 1998 in the wake of an old and redundent circular issued in 1958. we are governed by the LIC employees regulations of 1960. the rules of 1958 were framed under the regulations of 1956, that were repealed when the new regulations of 1960 came into being. i appealed, but the AA also did not gave any reprieve. i filed a meorial but the same was rejected by the chairman in 2001. i filed a suit before the court of law in 2004, but the lower court also did not decided in my favouer and the case is now at the appeal stage before a ADJ. in the meantime the RTI came.
the CPIO in an information stated that the circular of 1958 was valid even in 1998. the AA also stated the same thing. the 2ndAA the CIC also ruled in the same manner as stated by the CPIO and AA. in a seperate RTI application the highest office of LIC informed that the rules were framed in 1958 to tackle a then prevailing matter and it was not in force thereafter. now i have filed a complaint before the CIC under section 18E of RTI act and the decision is still pending. is there any other remedy avaialable to me to bring the culprits in the book and the punsihment awarded after a charge sheet in 1998 be curtailed? please advise.
regards
Mohinder singh kamboj
mskamboj@thekimt.com
09354920313
11/4/2011