Naval Rungta
31 January 2014 at 08:53
Respected Experts, In spite of your opinion earlier in the matter that the Consent Terms are binding on parties, the Civil City Court - Mumbai has rejected the Execution Application filed with in 2 yrs. of consent term order passed by the same court due to deliberate non compliance by judgement debtors. Pl. see the attached order and advice further course of action as I am pitted against people with criminal mindset and involved in large scale frauds.
crpc
31 January 2014 at 08:40
Dear Sir,
It is very well known, that many laws are their for sexual/financial/emotional harassment of girl. But is there any law for protect man harassment by girl ? For example if girl deceive boy for financial benefits by false statements of n... . need/friendship/love or any other kind If there is any law which protect man...kindly respond with...
Thanks & Regards.
AR
Premanand Singh
31 January 2014 at 07:20
Hi Sir,
Plz help me as Im unable to find out any relevant judgment or documents.
1.What is the meaning of direct recruits ? It is mention in O.B.C documents after Mandal commission.
2. My father's
case : He was recruited as Medical
officer in class 2 . He gets the same
rank till he is 45 years old.But his
pay scale had increased to class 1
due to various pay revisions. Will his
post classification be considered as
class1 when he is 45 years old ? plz
help me out.
Naval Rungta
31 January 2014 at 07:07
Respected Experts, In spite of your opinion earlier in the matter the Civil City Court - Mumbai has rejected the Execution Application filed with in 2 yrs. of consent term order passed by the same court. Pl. see the attached order and advice further course of action as I am pited against people with criminal mindset and involved in large scale frauds.
Amit Kumar
31 January 2014 at 06:06
Can It is possible a case of adverse possession can be decided by a addl. Tahasildar?
The detail is as under,during the major settlement operation in yadast no.323 enquiry was made and on the basics of possession and oral sale the land was ordered to be recorded in the name of XYZ on 26/07/1964. During the bujharat or attestion stage of the settlement proceeding in 1974, one of the tannent namely D objected to the khanapuri or yadast entry saying that the land was mortaged to the khanapuri rayat and not sold. The Asst. Settlement Officer passed order that he cannot decide the question of adverse possession and passed to record the ABC as rayats and note the possession of oral puchhaser as jabar dakhal(forcible possession). Also The A.S.O. say that adverse possession can be decided by the civil court hence XYZ go to the civil court for title and possession.
After that XYZ filled a mutation case in the court of Tahasildar . The Tahasildar allowed the mutation on the basics of oral purchase by XYZ in the year 1940, note of possession in the ROR , some rent receipts and settlement proceding record.
Is the mutation case is as per law or illegal ? please guide me.
kamal singhal
30 January 2014 at 22:08
sir, finance ministry announce a moratorium on repayment of loans and intrest for one year in all kind of loans that is outstanding in uttrakhand as on 1/8/2013 now after six month they issued a corrigendum and and add some conditiones .please tell this modification will applicable only after 6/1/2014 or it will applicable from 1/8/2013.what will be status of loans in which bank took illegal posssion and auctined the property even after 1/8/2013 date of morattorium.when no condition was attetehedso please help us by giving clarification about the status of corrigendum issued in 6/1/2014.
AYAN
30 January 2014 at 20:37
can I use any word as my signature?
Signature can be any symbol or word. Isn't it?
can I write any word or any symbol as my signature in my bank account?
shivanand
30 January 2014 at 18:57
Dear sir,
We have purchased 7 acre of land which was granted to one of shivappa kallappa naikmakkal in the year 1966 with a condition of non-alienation of the land for a period of 15 years. The grantee alienated the land during the year 1982 and 1985.which is after completion of 15 year.we is the 3rd purchaser of the land.
The grantee filed a case with assistant commissioner dharwad (Karnataka),during the year 2005 stating that he belongs to HINDU VALMIKI caste which has been classified as scheduled tribe community there by lending to violation of clause 4(2) of the PTCL act with contention of resumption of land back to original grantee.
The assistant commissioner dharwad heard the case and rejected the petition standing that the caste of the grantee has been classified as scheduled tribe community W.E.F 19/04/1991.the grantee filed and appeal to deputy commissioner dharwad during the year 2006-07 .the D.C dharwd has heard the case and upheld the judgment of AC dharwad.
The grantee again preferred an writ petition to the High court of Karnataka during 2009 the court had heard the case and again remanded back to the case to the DC dharwad for hearing and for passing appropriate order. Now the case has been called for hearing by the DC on 25/02/2014.
In regards to the judgment issued by the high court single and double bench the following points have been brought to perusal the constitution scheduled tribe order 1950 has been issued as per the provision of article 342 of constitution classifying the community under ST and several amendments have been issued to the presidential notification 1950 by adding caste of person inserted to the ST list w.e.f 19/04/1991 “Naik,Nayak,Beda,Bedar &valmiki” (constitution 2nd amendment 1991 copy and bill passed by Lok saba copy enclosed )
As states above caste every Amendments to presidential notification of 1950. Thre is a specific Effective date, month & year on which the caste for to be considered as ST.
In such circumstances the judgments have been issued by the Hon’ble judges considering the caste added to the ST with “Retrospective effect” with revert back to the presidential notification 1950.
Without considering the effect dates,month,&year of amendments by issue of judgments considering as Retrospective effect of 1950, injustice has been caused to the purchaser of the land there by resumption of purchaser land back to original grantee.
In view of the above the necessary classification requires on the following points
1) Whether the constitution scheduled tribe all amendments & modification amendments are Retrospective or prospective?
2) On what bases the judgments have issued considering the constitution amendments to revert back to presidential notification 1950?
3) If the all amendments are Retrospective effect for this any of the notification issued in this regards?
Dear sir kindly as soon as possible necessary legal advice on the above the doubts may please I communicated.
We are waiting for kind advice
Thanking you sir
Shivanand m desai
9986980722
Annu
30 January 2014 at 18:03
sir,
i have been sending to a defaulter registered A/d letters.but the person do not accept them.the postman mentions on the envelope that he visited 3 times but the party refused to accept the letter.
1.what are its legal implications?
2.how do i ensure that the defaulter is intimated of his legal duties?
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
To apponit advocate commissioner
To appoint commissioner ,as I came to know opposite party filed wrong plan ,should I mention to take measurements of my plot or should the measurements of opposite partys plot has to be made.