megalaw
26 October 2012 at 14:50
Sir, in my case a third party which was neither the plaintiff, nor the defendant filed a First appeal (under Section 96 CPC) admittedly after 30 days of passing of the decree. The third party in order to get over the 30 days limitation to file appeal as prescribed under Article 116 of the Limitation Act, merely relied on a case law of the Allahabad High Court in AIR 1981 Allahabad page 344 and the learned Court held the appeal to be within time while Article 116 provides for an appeal to be presented within 30 days and there are no exceptions. Is the order of the Court legal??
shantilal k. patel
26 October 2012 at 13:31
I have three Questions:
1. what is the difference between Motion to the suit and suit?
2.To succeed in defamation suit,what is to be proved?
3.How to find out past decided cases on Defamation?
s.k.patel
9892485457
Mumbai
Himanshu Jaiprakash Dad
26 October 2012 at 13:19
does an application under section 11 of the Arbitration act 1996 for appointment of arbitrator is maintainable when we have not filed any copy / original agreement.
we dont have any copy/original of the Arbitration agreement, section 8(2) of the act will make a bar in appointment of arbitrator.
we dont have any copy/original, what can we do further, advise
prasad1857
26 October 2012 at 13:18
Dear experts,
My father had purchased a land in 2004 in suburbs of hyderabad. In 2005 we came to know land encroachments from neighboring land owners. so, we appointed a local lawyer to tackle the problem. After six long years of strenuous struggle we won the case and not able to bear the financial burden, we sold the above said property for a through away prize and firstly, we clear all the dues to the lawyer.
The lawyer, being familiar with the case, provocated other and even filed a case against my father. Now, he is demanding money from my father to resolve the issue outside the court which he has created.
Please advise any legal remedy to get rid of this blackmailing lawyer.
Thank you.
Harsh
26 October 2012 at 12:33
Sir,
Can the settlement between the parties at a mediation center setup by Delhi government is having value in front of the courts?
Is it true that when once right is extinguished it never regain it position back ?
If somebody accepts other person as his landlord in a mediation center even knowing the fact that he himself is a owner by adverse possession than such is this statement is valid ?
cvb
26 October 2012 at 12:22
My grandfather bought 5 acres property and built house and factory on this land. He expired suddenly when I was very young. We are three brothers, and recently due to various issues we decided to stop doing joint business and sold our property to constructor on the agreement that he pays us 35 lakhs initially and once flats are built we each get 4 apartments. All of us including my mother have signed on all the agreement papers. But due to various delays, builder took 3 years to start construction at the Site.
Meanwhile, my 2nd brother's family wanted to stay at the empty house on site. After an year, builder sent out notice to them asking them to vacate ,so that he can start construction. 2nd brother's family did not heed to notice and filed a seperate claim, that this property should be partitioned across all the grand children as they are rightful share holders, and that this documnent is not valid. Also they claim that, 2nd brother did not sign the document though that is not the truth. In few weeks, my 2nd brother changed his mind and wanted to be on our side but he died due to cancer. Now the construction is stalled, and the case is in court ..and they have been taking stay for almost 1 year every other hearing stating false excuses and we are stuck, as we are unable to get any income from this place. My question is from legal point of view, what can we do to fasten this process.
Also I was wondering, if we can issue a court order asking them to vacate the house, as this is not solely their property either. Is that advisable and possible?
Dhruv
26 October 2012 at 11:50
Dear All,
In a case of disputes in a partnership firm (Defendant No. 1), the Hon' Civil Court has passed the following order:
"The Court Commissioner shall determine the immovable and movable properties and cash of defendant No. 1 firm within two months from the date of passing of this order and shall submit his detailed report before this Court.
The Court Commissioner is authorized to obtain the services of Chartered Accountant for determining the books of accounts of defendant No. 1 partnership firm and the expenditure regarding the same shall be made after obtaining prior consent of both the parties."
The firm has not been maintaining books of accounts and is has been filing Provisional Accounts in the Court every -3- months as per the previous Court Order.
My query is as to what is the expected from the Chartered Accountant appointed as per the above Order?. Is he expected to determine as to what are the assets and liabilities of the firm or is he even expected to make a Fair valuation of the same as this is a case of disputes where one partner wants to retire and his share is to be determined.
What does the term "determine books of accounts" and "determine the immovable and movable properties" mean in the above Order? Does it include only ascertaining and listing out all the liabilities and assets of the firm or does it also include making a Fair Valuation of them?
AAK
26 October 2012 at 11:15
Dear Experts need your valuable advise.. pls help
I am preparing a draft of Non disclosure Agreement between Indian Company and Japanies Company. While negotiating the terms, the japanies company is insisting for jurisdiction of Singapore court which is neutral country. If i mention Sigapore courts as jurisdiction to entertain the dispute, how far it is valid?
I feel the position of law as per Sec.20 CPC is - jurisdiction on the court that otherwise does not have any jurisdiction.. the clause is invalid.
Is there any ruling which has overruled this preposition ?? I am confused..
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
How to recover money?
1. 138 complaint case acquits accused u/s 141 though cognizance taken was u/s 138?
2. accused admits liability, issue of cheque, dishonor of cheque, non-payment despite receiving notice.
3. limitation u/o 37 - can the period under proceedings of s. 138 NI Act be condoned to initiate summary proceedings under Order 37 C.P.C.
4. notice issued under order 37 C.P.C. was on 17//2008 but case not filed as accused in 138 proceedings kept stating that they would like to settle and changed version once three years lapsed from 17/3/2008.
5. notice issued were in the names of the Directors of the company and no notice was issued separately or independently against the company.
6. case u/s 138 was not dismissed on any ground except that the accused are acquitted u/s 141 - it is an acquittal order but not a dismissal order.