Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 15:22
Is anybody is aware abt Commodity Exchange of India.
A public listed company into manufacturing business wants to apply for the membership of Commodity Exchange of Inida. Can it do so. If so what compliances are required to be fullfilled.Few compliances come in my mind alike.
1. The activity of sale and purchase in commodity should be included in the main object or the company should get the main object altered.
2. The may also require to inform the stock exchange about its new line of business.
3. Approval of the Board of directors
If anybody is aware abt the concept and compliances involed pls share your knowlede.
Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 15:21
Dear Sir/Madam,
My colleague has received a summon from Metropolitan court under PSS Act due to ecs failure. Please advice on the proceedings on the above act and how can it affect him.
Thanks
Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 15:20
What is a leave petition filed by a company. When and why does a company file it.
Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 15:16
Dear Experts,
There was an agricultural land with number 105 and area 0.902 Hectare on a road side in the name of Mr. KP. The said road connects two towns( Town A and Town B) of the same district of UP. Some 4-5 years back I bought a portion of the land (No. 105). The sale deed for the said portion measuring 0.135 Hectare, square in shape, mentioning the boundaries - in North - road connecting town A and town B, in East – land of X and others, in South – the remaining portion of the land 105 of Mr. KP and in West - the remaining portion of the land 105 of Mr. KP, got executed by Mr. KP in the name of my wife V on date D.
After the execution of the above sale deed, Mr. KP executed another sale deed for another portion of land 105 in the name of N on the same date D. The descriptions for the second portion in the sale deed to N, are: area 0.65 Hectare, boundaries- in North - road connecting town A and town B, in East – land of V, in South – the remaining portion of the land 105 of Mr. KP and in West - the land of Y and others.
After the execution of the above mentioned sale deeds, the sale deeds along with parties were presented in the office of registrar for registration on the same date D. N got its sale deed registered with registration number R1 while V got its sale deed registered later with registration number R2.
Last year one KSK dealership from IOCL was rostered in my village on road connecting the towns A & B. The land requirement was 70ft X 70ft for KSK dealership. There were three applications from V, K and R. All the three applicants were called for interview and the result was declared on the same date by IOCL. K did not qualify as K got 0 marks against land & infrastructure. V got placed first and R got placed second. And V was the selected candidate.
But on the next day, K filed a Writ Petition in HC against IOCL alleging that there was favouritism and IOCL has awarded 0 marks in arbitrary manner. Moreover, V, the selected candidate was not made party. WP was heard by the HC and HC order that there is alternate remedy available i.e. the IOCL grievance redresal authority. HC further directed the IOCL to dispose of the matter within 3 months. Thereby, K & R submitted their representation complaints to IOCL. IOCL (state unit GM) called V, K & R and heard them one by one. After hearing, the GM/IOCL constituted one committee to investigate the complaints of K & R. During the investigation the investigating Officer asked me to bring the original sale deed of V and N. The same were shown to the officer.
Finally, in compliance of the HC order, GM/IOCL took the decision on basis of the report submitted by Investigating Committee, and cancelled the selection and ordered re-interview. GM/IOCL dismissed the complaints/allegations of K & R and stated that on basis of the report from Investigating Committee, IOCL erred in awarding 29 marks for land & infra. to V as V has not submitted the consent from co-owners - Mr. KP and N, of land 105 along with the application. Not submitting consent is in the contravention of the IOCL policy, said GM/IOCL.
Now my question is that even if there are clear boundaries of V’s portion in land 105, V is not free to use it for any purpose. V has to take consent from Mr. KP and N?
Or another interpretation of GM/IOCL could be that since N’s sale deed was registered before V’s sale deed‘s registration, N becomes first co-owner with Mr. KP in land 105, then the boundary of V’s portion vis-a-vis with N’s portion becomes unclear and that is why V has to take consent from N and/or Mr. KP.
How much this interpretation is legally sustainable? Please advise me the remedy if any as there is no appellate authority in IOCL.
Please note that a land measuring 0.135 H, square in shape has dimension 120ft X 120ft while IOCL’s requirement is 70ft X 70ft.
Thanks a lot
Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 14:55
Dear Sir,
want a format for a Public notice for advertising the LOSS of share certificate of an individual on a Housing society letter head as the News paper wants on the letter head.
kindly help
thanks in advance
regds
Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 14:50
what is the court fees i will have to pay to file a suit to cancel the "release deed" obtained from me fruadulently. i have paid Rs 25/- AS COURT FEE AS PER sec 24[d] of karnataka court fees @suits valuation act . I am not asking for pocession of the property,please let me know the actual court fees to be paid.
Thank you
Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 14:47
Sam co. and ABC co. together have
about 45% of the existing market share in operating systems in the Europe. Sam
co. developed X-Operations bundled with software applications in
Games and the ABC co. developed Y-Operations bundled with software
applications in Entertainment for use in the Personal Computers. In order to enhance
their market share, these companies entered into an agreement on 1.11.2008 to
exclusively share the ‘interoperable’ properties, so that the user of X-Operations
can transfer data to Y-Operations and vice versa.
The Antitrust Division of the Europe Department of Justice initiated civil proceedings on
10.12.2008 against the Sam co. and abc co.. for indulging in
anticompetition and monopolistic activities by bundling software applications in the
operating systems and then entering into an agreement for exclusive sharing of
interoperable properties.
The Sam co. and ABC co. decided to sell their products in India
through their partly owned subsidiaries TC ltd and DC ltd
respectively (as in both the subsidiaries 20 percent of the equity shares were held
by Indians). Advertisements appeared in the print and electronic media highlighting
the features of X-Operations and Y-Operations and their exclusive
“interoperable” compatibility.
Simultaneously, the Government of India received a report from its Embassy in Europe informing about the harmful effects of X-Operations and Y-Operations
on the Indian market. The existing market players in India also petitioned
the Government of India and submitted that these operating systems will have a
prejudicial effect on their market share. In view of this, the Government of India acted
quickly and promulgated an ordinance on 1.1.2009 which was replaced by
an Act of the Parliament viz. Prohibition of the Entry and Sales of X-Operations
and Y-Operations Act, 2009 banning the entry and sales including
licensing for a period of 2 years.
I just want to know….
1.Whether, the Parliament has competency to pass the Act of 2009?
2. whether, the above Act violates article 14,19 and 21 of constitution?
Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 14:43
Dear Mr. RR Krishna, Mr B K R Rao and Mr. K Thadhani kindly refer my quary regarding corporate law posted on 12.02.2010. Many many thanks for your kind suggestion. Trust to get support in future also.Mr. Thadhani as you advised to get involved with reputed corporate law firm in this concern would like tell you that i have tried a lot but the firm which have agreed to retain me have provided very negligible ctc as compared to the present. But i shall try a lot so long i get a better because i want better exposure. Can you refer any good reputed solicitor firm of Kolkata. Please, if you have.
Regards,
Anonymous
06 April 2011 at 14:36
sir\madam
i married to vibhawri on 6\7\2008.before that vibhawri married to milind on 1\1\2005.But milind expired on 17\11\2007.on 3\7\2008 vibhawri father took the rights(haq) from their ancestral property forcefully .will she get back her rights? can she file a case against her father?in which category it comes?
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
legal position of trust i n developing open space
trust has got the rights to develop the garden in open space of layout within corporation area, ulternatively the trust is allowed to construct a meditation hall in the same garden. what is the legal position of a trust as far as owenrship is concerned. or the future problems may arise in smooth use of meitation hall?