Amit
02 March 2013 at 22:04
Hello All,
I m defendant and have a civil case and unfortunately the lawyers we had hired till now were not good enough. So i am about to change my lawyer for the 4th time.
Initially all seem promising, but the moment we hire them and they make there appearance in court, i dont know if the opposite party is bribing them or what, but they(my lawyers) suggest somethings which even a layman can tell tat it wont favor my side.
Does changing the lawyers often is not allowed by court? or is there any limitation.
This is not FUN for me either and painful, but to hand the case to someone not trust worthy enough is not pleasing.
Need you suggestion/solution and help.
Regards,
Amit
Mayank V
02 March 2013 at 21:53
i have land occupied by other person. he has legal electricity connection on this land for more than 10 yrs. though all other doc,s are in my name. he sue us under sec 30 and start depositing rent in court. kindly guide how to proceed in this case. pls revert on mail also.
under which sec. i must sue that i get upper hand in this case in lesser time.
RAMJI
02 March 2013 at 20:54
An intersting case comes out of RTI application as follows:
1. Grandfather (MrM) had got his share of ancestral properties in 1945 thro a family partition deed registered, thereafter enjoyed the properties, had married and gave birth to three children (2 sons + 1 daughter)....
2.During 1996 Grand Pa executed a Power of Attorney to some THIRD PARTY OUT OF FAMILY TO DEAL WITH ONE OF ANCESTRAL PROPERTY IN WHICH GRANDPA+ 2 SONS WERE ALSO SIGNATORIES. ( without signature of daughter and grand children who were major at that time)
3.Thereafter in 1999 GRAND PA EXPIRED NATURALLY LEAVING WIDOWED GRAND MA AND 2 SONS + 1 DAUGHTER AND GRAND CHILDREN.
4. In year 2000 (After expiry of one of Principals), the GPA holders SOLD A PORTION OF PROPERTY TO SOME XYZ on the basis of GPA
which is handicapped on THE EXPIRY OF ONE OF PRINCIPAL ( MEANS TO SAY USING GPA OF DEAD MAN...) and WITHOUT EVEN MAKING A FRESH GPA OR CONSENT OF THE LEGAL HEIRS LIVE...
5. The best part of it is IN YEAR 2001 THE TWO SONS ALSO GAVE NO OBJECTION FOR TRANSFERRING PATTA ON THE NAME OF PURCHASER OF PORTION SOLD OUT BY GPA HOLDERS.
The two gentlemen (sons) are knowing all these and simply inactive as the property is in possession of those INTELLIGENT GPA HOLDERS.
now, Questions are
1. Whether any of the legal heirs can they challenge this GPA (To that extent that one of the principals out of three is VOID AS HE EXPIRED BEFORE THE SALE WAS MADE IN 2000 AND RECTIFICATION DEED OR FRESH GPA HAS BEEN MADE SO FAR
2. CAN ANY OF THESE LEGAL HEIRS FILE SUIT FOR PARTITIONING THE SHARE OF THE EXPIRED GRAND PA AS HIS GPA IS DEAD WHEN HE DIED.
3.any other views /ways to bring this out before court of law pls advise
Regards
Ramji
Damayanti
02 March 2013 at 20:46
If Respondent has traversed all the allegations in plaint and pleaded new facts in defense which the petitioner missed out as half truth.
Doesn't the counter allegation of vexacity and frivolity become a Counter claim or at leasst an equitable set off?
Since in above context, there is no counter claim and only equitable set off is there, as per current settled case laws .... plaintiff is not obligated to file any replication.
And also even though plaintiff doesn't file any replication to explain those 'new facts' stated in WS, the plaintif is automatically enjoying doctrine of 'implied' and 'assumed' traverse against those 'new facts' in Ws.
Thus he is automatically escaped from doctrine of 'non-traverse'
This creates room for the plaintiff to take u-turns and twists and travel beyond pleadings as well as cook up new story as it evolves.
Is it not a breach of 'fair trial'?
Also those 'new facts' aren't made part of 'framed issues'
I thought to file a separate 'notice to admit facts'(on behalf ofrespondent) to compell petitioner come with some answers as to those 'new facts' and in the same if there is evasive denial or non-traverse then it may help respondent.
Is this an inherent flaw?
i.e. respondent has be wary about non-traverse (all facts assumed to be admitted unless explicitly denied), but the petitioner is awarded 'assumed traverse' (all facts assumed to be denied) against the stated 'new facts' in WS
Please give your valued comments.
Hon'ble Court said 'I can't treat non-traverse of those 'new facts' as an admission from petitioner'.
How would you tackle such scenario?
RAMJI
02 March 2013 at 20:29
In a civil suit for partition, 1 plaintiff and 8 defendents. 6 of them (d3 to d8) are set exparte. After 9 months D1 & D2 filed W/s . Just one day before W/s, D2 filed a I.A TO REJECT PLAINT.
Plaintiff is planning to file COUNTER AGAINST I.A....on perusal plaintiff found that WRITTEN STATEMENT OF D1 & D2 ARE GENERIC WITH NO SPECIFIC DENIAL AND PROOF /DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENCE STAND while on this pls advise on following:
1. Should the plaintiff file counter against I.A at first instant itself?
2. After filing counter against I.A should the plaintiff file a separate application for REPLY TO W/S of D1&D2
OR
3. Can the plaintiff file both COUNTER + APPLICATION FOR REPLY TO W/S on the same day/time?
4. Kindly advise on relevant section of CPC dealing with APPLICATION FOR REPLY TO W/S
5. Also pls cite if there is any specific format on Application for Reply on W/s
6.Any other views pls
Thanks & Regards
Ramji
Sruthi Aravind
02 March 2013 at 20:12
an Indian entity purchased the entire shareholding of an Indian, in another Indian Company.In this regard, two Agreements were entered into- the first on 10.08.2011 (the “first agreement”) and the second on 10.10.2012 (the “second agreement”). The first agreement was a share purchase agreement which also provided for the consideration payable and for certain condition precedents to be complied with by the Seller.
Following the first agreement, the parties, by way of an exchange of emails agreed on the mechanics for execution of the payment obligations under the first agreement. In particular, they agreed to a staggered payment of the consideration in three stages, each payment being due after the completion of a condition precedent
The first agreement contained an arbitration clause providing for arbitration in Singapore. The law governing the underlying contracts and the law governing the arbitration agreement was not set out in the two agreements.
The agreement also contained a provision which provided that the parties waived their right to approach a Court for seeking any interim relief.
1.can such a provision waiving a right be added?
2.can the place of arbitration be at a foreign country in this circumstance?
3.does the seat at singapore makes the first part of the Arbitration Act not applicable to this case?
Basheer
02 March 2013 at 17:45
I request Experts/Lawyer give solution to my query.
In the March 2009, I applied for central govt, LDC job. Let say this as JOB A (VIZAG). I got hall ticket for written test. I attended for written test also. Later JOB A (VIZAG) authority cancelled written test for everyone.
In the Feb, 2010. I applied for another central govt, LDC job. Let say this as JOB B (HYD). After written, skill test and Personal interview, I got appointment letter and joined in JOB B (HYD), as LDC on Feb 9, 2011. They said probation is for 2 years.
In the March, 2012, once again I got hall ticket (same hall ticket number) for JOB A (VIZAG) written test. Once again, I attended written test. I cleared written test, skill test and personal interview for JOB A (VIZAG), LDC. I got appointment letter also and need to join on 20 Mar 2013
JOB A (VIZAG) is in Vizag, which is my home town.
JOB B (HYD) is in Hyderabad.
In JOB B (HYD), in the month of DEC, 2012, I got show cause notice mentioning, they will terminate me. I have attached show cause notice, please refer it.
I am still in probation in JOB B (HYD)
Now, can I resign JOB B (HYD) straight away. If I put resignation, will they accept?
If they won’t accept, will I have any problem in JOB A (VIZAG)?
Please help me. Please give some advice/suggestions.
SHOW CAUSE NOTICE
[Rule 18 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965]
ORDER
WHEREAS the government servant specified below are concerned in a disciplinary case
MY NAME
NOW, THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers, conferred by sub rules (1) and (2) of Rule 18, Central Civil services (CCA) rules, 1965, the undersigned hereby directs :-
(i) That disciplinary action against all the said government servants shall be taken in a common proceeding
(ii) That xxxx (officer name), shall function as the disciplinary authority for the purpose of the common proceeding and shall be competent to impose the penalty of Termination of service.
(iii) That the procedure prescribed in Rule 14 shall be followed in the said proceedings.
niky......
02 March 2013 at 16:55
During the Framing stage of a case in court, can the lawyers of both defendant and plaintiff suggest the court to which points shall be kept or not.
Or its only the judge who decides without intervention of either lawyer?
k gurumoorthy
02 March 2013 at 16:36
judgement copy of WP3763/2002 IN wp6295/2002 IN wp 35337/2002 is required pls madras high courtjudgement
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Sec 90 evidence act 1872
Respected Sir/Madam,
Please confirm that can any body challenge the signature on the document as forge after 30 year.
As the document which they are challenging is made in the year 1980.stating that there is a forge signature are there in that.
One more think as the file the case in the year 2008 as that time the document is 28 year old.
can we take the plea for sec 90 of evidence act now.
thank and regards
imtiaz