Anonymous
01 March 2011 at 22:49
R/Experts,
I have ancestral house in which we two brothers reside.Now my brother going to sell his share to another person though I am ready to purchase it.Please tell me,can I restrain my brother to alinate his share? Can I purchase it with help of Court? If yes by which suit?
Anonymous
01 March 2011 at 22:47
Hon experts,
A Sunni Muslim unmarried male has died instate leaving behind his father, mother and three brothers. How his self acquired property will devolve among the legal heirs?
Plz. Advice, and post any related judgment/material on muslim succession law in India.
With thanks and regards.
Anonymous
01 March 2011 at 21:44
A co-opertaive society which is controling a sugar mill gave employment to 125 persons as daily wagers and all benefits given .worked more than 10 years. and on 2001 put them out side.sugar industry closed . but now it is opened but not ready to taken the employees back. not collected thwe benifits. what is the remedy for employees? Thank you
Anonymous
01 March 2011 at 21:10
First wife deserted and husband got second marriage with out divorce and same registered. Now Husband died. Second wife wants to claim the benefits. The department is asking legal heir certificate.Can the second wife applied for legal heir certificate without informing the first marriage relation. issue are there in first marriage and no issues in second marriage. All this year first wife not turn up.Can the second wife applied for legal heir certificate?
Anonymous
01 March 2011 at 20:34
M.P filed before Consumer Forum in main petition to direct the opposite party to produce document. But opposite side told they has no documents and the consumer forum closed the petition .Whether appeal lie in the close petition ?
Anonymous
01 March 2011 at 17:21
Respected Experts,
Plz. Clarify the doubt.
I filed a SLP in the year 2005, which is still pending before the Supreme Court of India. After a period of 5 years, the case came up for hearing on 08-11-2010. The order of the court is as hereunder.
“On behalf of the respondents Nos. 4 and 5, it has been submitted that learned counsel appearing for the said respondents has undergone a surgical operation and, therefore, the matter may be adjourned for three weeks. Having regard to the above let the matter be adjourned for a period of three weeks and be listed immediately hereafter.”
Again the matter was posted on 29-11-2010. The order of the court is as hereunder.
“As pointed out by learned counsel for the respondents, allowing such a relief at this stage would amount to allowing the Special Leave Petition itself. Accordingly, we are not inclined to allow such prayer and the same is rejected.
However, since the matter is pending from 2005, let the Special Leave Petition itself be listed for final disposal as quickly as possible, but on a non-miscellaneous day, in the month of February, 2011”.
Again the matter was posted on 02-02-2011. The order of the court is as hereunder.
“On the prayer made on behalf of the respondent Nos.4 and 5, three weeks time is granted for filing counter affidavit. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed within three weeks thereafter.
Now the matter is posted to 28-03-2011. I have been contending the above said case for the last 40 years in various courts. Only to drag on the above case, the Respondents are taking time.
At this movement, what steps I have to take for early disposal, in case if the Respondents again seek an adjournment on 28-03-2011.
prakash
01 March 2011 at 14:38
Sir,
In 1990 a man had gifted a sum of Rs.25000=00 to another person who was not his relative.The gift deed was duly signed by him and witnessed by two person.Now in Feb.2011 his son writes aleeter to the person to whom the gift was given to return the amount with interest as his father is a lay man and does not understand anything.Can he claim this amount?Please advice.
Anonymous
01 March 2011 at 12:43
can a judge be made a respondent for any of his judgment given?
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Artilce 227 of the indian consitution of india.1949
34- Civil court not to have jurisdiction –
No civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter which a Debts Recovery Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal is empowered by or under this Act to determine and no injunction shall be granted by any court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act or under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (51 of 1993.
35- The provisions of this Act to override other laws –
The provisions of this Act shall have effect, notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law.
227. Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court
(1) Every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories interrelation to which it exercises jurisdiction
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provisions, the High Court may
(a) call for returns from such courts;
(b) make and issue general rules and prescribe forms for regulating the practice and proceedings of such courts; and
(c) prescribe forms in which books, entries and accounts shall be kept by the officers of any such courts
(3) The High Court may also settle tables of fees to be allowed to the sheriff and all clerks and officers of such courts and to attorneys, advocates and pleaders practising therein: Provided that any rules made, forms prescribed or tables settled under clause ( 2 ) or clause ( 3 ) shall not be inconsistent with the provision of any law for the time being in force, and shall require the previous approval of the Governor
(4) Nothing in this article shall be deemed to confer on a High Court powers of superintendence over any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the Armed Forces.
Query : So as per the above section & article we can say that The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 is over & above the Indian Constitution Of India, 1949. Because section 34 say the word "any court" & section 35 say "notwithstanding" but the article 227 says that 227. Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court
(1) Every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories interrelation to which it exercises jurisdiction
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provisions, the High Court may
(a) call for returns from such courts;
(b) make and issue general rules and prescribe forms for regulating the practice and proceedings of such courts; and
(c) prescribe forms in which books, entries and accounts shall be kept by the officers of any such courts
(3) The High Court may also settle tables of fees to be allowed to the sheriff and all clerks and officers of such courts and to attorneys, advocates and pleaders practising therein: Provided that any rules made, forms prescribed or tables settled under clause ( 2 ) or clause ( 3 ) shall not be inconsistent with the provision of any law for the time being in force, and shall require the previous approval of the Governor
(4) Nothing in this article shall be deemed to confer on a High Court powers of superintendence over any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the Armed Forces.
So which will prevail or Apllicable artilce 227 or section 34 or 35 in case of wordings which are narrtaed in the section & articles.
God Bless U ALl.
Thanks In Advance,