Member (Account Deleted)
11 April 2009 at 08:57
Sir/Madam,
My unlce has invested in Snowcem Ltd company sum of Rs.20000 for FD scheme.Which was to be matured in year 2003.And company at the time of granting FD agreed in written to pay amount back at the date of maturity long with the interest rate pre decided.
But on date of maturity company only paid him the sum of Interest eligible at that time.And company did not paid him back their origional sum of Rs.20000 yet.
We are talking to companies from many years but company only respod us by saying that they are ready to pay back the FD deposit by giving only Rs.10000 and with condition that we are agreed to forgo our right on remaining Rs.10000.
The company has cheated to many other persons by the same.What should be done by my unlce?And how they can approach to the same case?
Thanks
fowmina c
11 April 2009 at 02:05
WITH REFERENCE TO WAR CRIMES ANALYZE THE OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES TO AN ARMED CONFLICTS TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN CIVILIAN AND MILITARY TARGETS WHEN THE COMBATANTS OF INE SIDE INITATES MILITARY ACTIONS FROM WITH CIVILIAN AREAS ..?
EXAMPLE = SRINLANKA 2008-2009
V.V.RAMDAS
09 April 2009 at 23:34
Sir/Madad
Please do provide upto date case law of SC in connection with Accident case Law.If the accused driver is charge sheeted u/s 181 M.V Act for not haveing a driviling licence at the time of accident. Whether the insurance comany is liable for payment of Compensation amount/awarded amount. Should the compay 1st pay and get it recovered from the owner? Reply urgent.
S.N.Derashri
09 April 2009 at 21:18
Please qoute some latest authorities from Supreme court as well as any of the High Court holding a compulsory retirement pending DE is illegal and void ab initio.
S.N.Derashri
A.Mohamed Thaheer
09 April 2009 at 16:35
In the light of leading judgment of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Vishaka & others vs State of Rajasthan (1997), I seek one clarification.
If the harassment commences from the women staff, what is the remedy? If the women vindictively makes a false complaint, what is the remedy to the male member, because, the supreme court recent judgments appears always goes in favour of female members only.
How to prevent such misuse of this judgment by women employees.
Ravindra Sheth
09 April 2009 at 13:23
Dear Sir,
Our company has give one of our property to another company on lease agreement. As per Agreement they will bare maintenance charges & paid with rent. They have take position of premises more than one month before showed agreement date.
My Question is Can I charges rent and Maintenance Charges for the Period between Position date & Agreement Date?
please give suggestion in details.
regards,
Ravi
Ashey
09 April 2009 at 11:56
what is the procedure to be adopted in filing a change of vakalath when the previous advocate on court record refuses to make 'no objection' endorsement ?
Ashey
09 April 2009 at 11:37
What is the amount of fee the advocate appearing for the petitioner is legally entitled to in an MCOP fild in the year 2000 ( Motor Accident Cases)- Death case - if the award amount of Rs. 4,00,000 is passed in the year 2009 (amount also deposited) - Claimants are widow of the deceased, and 2 minor sons ( who are major at the time of passing the award i.e at 2009 )
SRIPRAKASH BHATTACHARYA
08 April 2009 at 23:33
08.04.2009
DEAR SIRS,
AS PER WEST BENGAL CO-OPERATIVE ACTS, 1983 AND RULES 1987 DIRECTORS OF A BORAD ARE ELECTED BY THE GENERAL MEMEBRS AND IN TURN THE DIRECTORS ELECT THE CHAIRMAN, VICE CHAIRMAN, SECRETARY AND TREASURER ARE ELECTED BY THE DIRECTORS AMONGST THEMSELVES TO WHICH THE GENERAL MEMEBRS ARE NOT A PARTY.
‘UNDER RULE NO. 50, ‘POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE CHAIRMAN AND VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE SOCIETEY’ IT IS WRITTEN THAT :-
"THE POWER OF THE CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF DIRECETORS SHALL HAVE THE FULL COTROL OVER THE ADMINISTRATION AND BUSINESS THE SOCIETY AND SHALL SUPERVIISE THE FUNCTIONS OF THE SOCIETY ON BEHALF THE BOARD AND SHALL HAVE POWER TO CALL ANY RECORD OF THE SOCIETY OR ANY OF THE SOCIETY OR ANY REPORT FROM THE CHIEF EX.OFFICER OR THE SECRETARY TO SATISFY HIMSELF THAT THE AFFAIRS OF THE SOCIETY HIMSELF THAT THE AFFAIRS OF THE SOCIETY ARE BEING MANAGED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESOURCE OF THE BOARD.
PROVIDED THAT THE CHAIRMAN OR THE VICE-CHAIRMAN, AS THE CASE MAY BE, SHALL NOT ACT IN CONTRAVENTION OR ANY OTHER GIVEN OR DECISION TAKEN BY THE BOARD IN TS MEETING.
AND
UNDER RULE 41 B‘REMOVAL AND RECALL OF A MEMBER OF ABORAD AND AN OFFICE BEARER’ IT IS WRITTEN THAT:-
1. AN ELECTED MEMBER OF A BOARD MAY BE REMOVED (BY 2/3RD OF THE DIRECTORS) FROM THE OFFICE BY A GENERAL MEETING WITH DUE AGENDUM
2. “AN OFFICE BEARER MAY BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE BY A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD AT A METTEING SPECIALLY CONVENED FOR THE PURPOSE”
AS IT WAS FOUND THAT THE SECRETARY OF THE BOARD WAS NOT GIVING HIS TIME TO THE WORK OF THE SOCIETY AND ALSO WORKING AGAINST THE INTEREST OF THE SOCIETY AS WELL AS THE BOARD, THE CHAIRMAN VIDE A NOTICE STATED THEREIN THAT:-
“AN EMERGENCY MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS WILL BE HELD ON………..AT ……PM .AT THE OFFICE OF THE SOCIETY, KOLKATA -45 TO DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING:-
*AS PER PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN RULE 50 OF THE WB COOP. SOCIETIES RULES, 1987 – WHWTHER THE AFFIRS OF THE SOCIETY ARE BEING MANAGED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESOLUTIONS OF THE BOARD AND ACTION NEED TO BE TAKEN AS PER PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN RULE 41(2) OF THE wb c00P. SOCIETIES RULES, 1987 AS AN URGENT REMIDIAL MEASURES*
THE SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY ALSO RECEIVED, ACCEPTED THIS NOTICE DULY SIGNED AND ACCORDINGLY A MEETING WAS HELD ON 11.012.2008. HOWEVER, THE SECRETARY DID NOT ATTENT THE SAME, HOWEVER, ALL OTHER DIRECTORS ATTENEDED THE SAME.
DURING THE MEETING IT WAS DISCUSSED THAT THE CHAIRMAN WELCOMED THE MEMBERS PRESENT AND INFORMED THEM THAT UNDER WHAT CICUMSTANCES THE MEETING WAS CONVENED. SHRI …………………………,(HEREIN THE SECRETARY) HOWEVER, REMAINED ABSENT WITHOUT ANY INFORMATION ALTHOGH HE RECEIVED THE NOTIVE ON ………………. AND SUBSEQUENTLY RESOLUTION WAS AS FOLLOWS:-
‘THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD DISCUSSED AT LENGTH VARIOUS MATTERS REGARDING THE AFFAIRS OF THE SOCIETY AND THE MANNER IN WHICH THESE WERE BEING CONDUCTED. THE CONSIDERED VIEW OF ALL THE MEMBERS PRESENT WAS THAT THE SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY, SHRI……………………..WAS NOT PROPERLY DISCHARGING THE RESPONSIBILITY AS SECRETARY IN THE BEST INETERST OF THE SOCIETY AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE REMOVED FROM THE POST OF SECRETARY WITH IMMEDIET EFFECT. ACCORDINGLY THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION AWS PASSED UNANIMIOUSLY.’
“IT IS RESOLVED THAT SHRI………………….., SECRETARY OF ………………………………….COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. IS REMOVED FROM THE POST OF SECRETARY OF THE SAID SOCIETY WITH IMMEDIET EFFECT AS PER RULE 41(2) OF THE WBCS RULES, 1987.”
ON THIS THE SECRTARY CONTESTED AND WROTE TO THE MINISTER, RCS AND DRCS THAT HE HAS BEEN REMOVED ILLEGALLY. HE APPLIED POLITICAL INFLUENCE AND WE EXPECT AN INQUIRY BY THE DRCS.
MY QUESTION IS THAT IN RULE 41 (2) IT IS WRITTEN “MAY BE” AND NOT “SHALL BE” REMOVED. WHEN IT IS WRITTEN ‘MAY BE’ THEN IS IT MANDATORY THAT THE OFFICE BEARER, WHOM, WILL BE REMOVED HAS TO BE SPECIFICALLY TOLD ABOY THE DESIGNATION OF THE OFFICE BEARAER. IF THE DESIGNATION OF THE OFFICE BEARER IS WRITTEN, EVEN THOUGH HE MAY NOT ACCEPT/RECEIVE THE NOTICE.
MY QUESTION
Member Strength 9,49,370 and growing..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
CENTRAL CIVIL SERVICE (Pension) Rules, 1972
What is the legal implication of Rule 9 (6)(b) in the case of retired pensioner?
Case in Brief:
A govt. servant had no judicial proceeding pending on the date of retirement. But, there was only F.I.R. pending on the date of retirement and that too filed just 48 hours before retirement i.e. on 28-09-2004 for the alleged offence reportedly took place between 31-03-2001 12-04-2001.
All his retiral benefits withheld till date.
In such circumstances, what is the legal implication of the above shown rule?
Whether the high court has got power to supercede the rule to give his own reasoning and judgment. Is it not the violation of the constitution for having the rules framed under article 309 of the constitution?
Whether one high court can supercede the judgment of another high court in the same and similar situation and also to supreme court judgment.
Please,explain one by one indetail