AJIT KAWATKAR
03 January 2010 at 20:44
i have read the recent chenai high court judgement regarding the subject issue.we are facing the same nuisance in our unregistered apartment association;in pune.i would like to know whether we can use the judgement in court in maharashtra.kindly guide!
Rohit Suresh Gangawane
03 January 2010 at 17:58
Dear Seniors
The Application under order 7 Rule 11(d) came to be rejected by Co-Operative Court. The respondent is agitataing that that the dispute is barred by limitation i.e. the same is filed after 6 years.
From the ruling reported in 1997 (1)ALL MR 193 it appears that the proper Forum is High Court.
Please advise what is proper forum to approach against the said order passed by the co-operative court
Regards
Rohit Gangawane
Advocate
PRAKASHCHANDRA MARU
03 January 2010 at 12:53
in the civil court of the district the regular civil suit was lodged by the plaintiffs for the seeking relief not to make any change in the land by the defendant the said case was on the stage of the evidence and at that time application given by the plaintiff for the exhibit the documents which were produced by the plaintiffs like sale of agreement and receipts of it and allotment letters etc the said matter was kept for the hearing and afterwards the said application was granted accordingly the judgement of the GLR 1965 -845 and GLR 2001 (3) -2024 hence the application was granted therefore the original defendant went at highcourt and lodged the special cilvl application and rely upon the judgement bipinshantilal panchal v/s state of gujarat 2001 (3) glr 2024 para 14 that wherein it has benn held that if the objection relates to stamp duty of a document the court has to decide such objection first before proceedings further (in the objection application of the defendant the such objectation taken place that the documents likely to pay stamp duty should be not exhibited ) now original defendant lodged the special civil application and now the notice served to us then my query is that direct i have to reply of the said matter of direct argument will take place pls sugest me regards
mahendrakumar
03 January 2010 at 10:57
after receiving reply to a legal notice from the respondent is there a time limit to file a case at
(a) consumer courts
(b) civil courts
ravikantharaja
03 January 2010 at 10:06
property bequeated for religius purpose for instance for jamat should be used only that purpose. can anyone please let me know if there is any case law on this
V.V.RAMDAS
03 January 2010 at 00:27
DEAR FRIENDS,
CAN ANY BODY HELP ME IN PROVIDING THE CITATION DIFFERENCIATING BETWEEN THE "DOCUMENT" AND "INSTRUMENT"
V.V.RAMDAS
03 January 2010 at 00:08
Dear friends,
In a Consumer dispute the Opp.Party had filed his written version and the same is accepted by te forum and in the next date neither the party nor his advocat could attend the forum due to some unavoidable circumstances and in the subsequent date the forum passed exparte order. Now can it be resotored under order 9 rule 13 of the C.P.C ?
Rohit Suresh Gangawane
02 January 2010 at 20:04
Dear Seniors
The Application under order 7 Rule 11(d) came to be rejected by Co-Operative Court. The respondent is agitataing that the dispute is barred by limitation i.e. the same is filed after 6 years.
From the ruling reported in 1997 (1)ALL MR 193 it appears that the proper Forum is High Court.
Please advise what is proper forum to approach against the said order passed by the co-operative court
Regards
Rohit
Raja Sundarraman
02 January 2010 at 17:41
Respected Learned Sirs, my query is whether a registered Public Charitable Trust can be having an object aiming at carrying on business activities in the fields as specified in the deed for the purpose of funding the Corpus Fund of the Trust in order to met out its various charitable objects?
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Under Order 39 Rule 4 of Code of Civil rules
Can anyone explain me little bit elaborately Under Order 39 Rule 4 of Code of Civil rules (CPC) which states that
"(4) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorise the Court which passed a decree to execute such decree against any person or property outside the local limits of its jurisdiction.".