barun deka
28 April 2010 at 00:11
caqn a civil court pass a judgment wherein it grants relief to the defendant without a counter-claim? say declare a plaintiff's document as void?.... any decisions please post at the earliest need it by 9 2moro morning
arun bansal
28 April 2010 at 00:05
If affidavit mandatory under law along-with application u/s 151 cpc or with O1 r10, or O7r11, or O6r17?
what remedy available if not followed and judge allowed the irregularity of law
If productions of originals GPA/ or original SPA mandatory while filing for permission on behalf of other p'tiff
pratik
27 April 2010 at 18:27
Sir,
Pls Give me the explanation of the belowmentioned Act Pls Pls Pls Pls In detail. Pls Pls Pls
THE DECREES AND ORDERS VALIDATING ACT, 1936
ACT NO. 5 OF 1936 [ 26th April, 1936.]
An Act to remove certain doubts and to establish the validity of certain proceedings in High Courts of Judicature 1.
WHEREAS doubts have arisen as to the validity of certain proceedings in High Courts of Judicature 1 under the Letters Patent erecting and establishing those Courts;
AND WHEREAS it is expedient to terminate those doubts and to establish the validity of those proceedings;
It is hereby enacted as follows:-
1. Short title and extent.-
(1) This Act may be called the Decrees and Orders Validating Act, 1936 .
(2) 2[ It extends to the whole of India, except 3[ the territories which, immediately before the 1st November, 1956 , were comprised in Part B States.]]
2. Certain decrees and orders not to be called in question.- No decree passed or order made by the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, the High Court of Judicature at Madras or the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, in the exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction under clause 12 of its Letters Patent, or by the High Court of Judicature at Rangoon, in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction under clause 10 of its Letters Patent, shall be called in question in any proceedings before any other Court on the ground that the High Court passing the decree or making the order had no jurisdiction to pass or make the decree or order.
3. Restoration of proceedings.- Where in any proceedings concluded on or after the 26th day of August, 1935 , any such decree or order has been found to be invalid on such ground by any Court, such finding shall be void and of no effect; and the Court shall, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 (9 of 1908 ), or any other law for the time being in force, on application made within six months from the commencement of this Act by any person prejudicially affected by such finding, restore the proceedings at and continue the proceedings from the state reached immediately before the order embodying or based on such finding was made.
999999. This Act has been extended to and brought into force in Dadra and Nagar Haveli (w. e. f. 1- 7- 1965 ) by Reg. 6 of 1963, s. 2 and Sch. I.
1. The words" in the Provinces" omitted by the A. O. 1950. 2 Subs., ibid., for sub- section (2). 3 Subs. by the Adaptation of Laws (No. 3) Order, 1956, for" Part B States".
Pls Help Me Explain me the abovementioned act in details.
Thanking U All Experts in Advance.
Gaurav Agarwal
27 April 2010 at 14:01
Can three parties be part of one contract? Let us Party first enter into contract with party to at the same time in same time party first enter into contract with party third? Is it legal to have one document instead of two?
Anonymous
27 April 2010 at 12:15
Respected members ,
I am working in public limited company
iwant Name of sites which gives free supreme court ,high court mumbai judements on net b coz all sites require subscibtion money in order to access the judjement
Thanks in Advance for valuable reply
Prasanna Simha
27 April 2010 at 12:13
Hi,
I want to know whether e-mail correspondence is treated as valid communication in civil laws. If so please provide more details on this.
vineet advocate
27 April 2010 at 11:57
what is the value of application form in allotment of a flat?
Arvind Singh Chauhan
27 April 2010 at 07:58
Whether except the writ of mandamus in high court, any govt. authority can be directed by lower to take particular action or to do particular action. Up to what extent mandatory injunction in CPC can be granted in this context.
Can we pray to lower court to direct the army pension shell to pay pension to particular person.
Can lower court can do so? If yes please suggest the law provision.
Rajan
27 April 2010 at 07:12
We lived only for 45 days in 1999 and then 'she' deserted me. To avoid threat to my life and to my family, I filed the divorce application in 2001 based on the hospital primary evidence of conspired design with mala fide intention of proving distorted names and wrong profession and address of the husband / father of the child she delivered in 34 weeks but fully grown baby.
Based on this I have filed the divorce of 'pregnancy before marriage' and 'unconsumed marriage', however in 2004 she filed for a DNA test.
After 10 long years, in the open court she accepted that with her other intentions she had distorted the particulars in the hospital documents and she pleaded guilty and the same day, I accepted paternity of the child in writing vide a memo in Nov 2009, that was accepted by the court.
As an after thought, she is insisting for a DNA test inspite of acceptance of the paternity and the court also has passed an order for paternity test inspite of acceptance of the paternity in writing.
Can you advice me, if the order is correct and can the court order for the test that has been accepted in writing for the sake of the females egoistic attitude.
Since I have accepted the paternity in writing vide a memo, can i seek any relief from the DNA test order
Thanks for your advice
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
affidavit
if def'dant not appeared before the court but present after the application of O 5 and stated that he has not received the summons. but in WS file by def'dant the same address on which the summons were sent attached alongwith affidavit verified by the advocates. What proceeding initiating against the lawyer and client for contempt of court.