Jayakumar
11 August 2015 at 21:02
Complaint against named accused for alleged or suspected murder of one's father to Police who launched FIR u/s.174 Cr.P.C r/w 176 IPC and started investigation; Recorded statements u/s.161 (3) of Cr.P.C of all the witnesses including named accused. Final report submitted stating complainant is a son born to one who was not married to him and the final report indicated that there was no such murder. The JM passed remarks against the Inspector of Police exceeding his investigation report. The complainant filed defamation case (malice) in civil court for damages. In the lower court damages awarded. Appeal preferred by Inspector of Police and also by District Collector who is also a party defendant in the defamation case. Now the question is:
In the lower court criminal court records especially 161(3) Cr.P.C statements which are favorable to the Inspector of Police could not be marked as exhibits. Whether they could be marked as exhibits in the defamation case in the appellate stage which is a subsequent case to the criminal case earlier stated in the light of Bar in the evidence act to mark the statements as exhibits but could be used only for contradicting purposes. Please answer the above query. I have to argue the appeal case within a week before District Judge.
rajan chopra
11 August 2015 at 16:43
Sir in a suit for recovery being filed by me with an application u/o 38 Rule 5, the case was put for replication by plaintiff and for reply by defendant after the written statement being filed by the defendant. The defendant filed reply and plaintiff could not file replication on next date.The case is now put for rejoinder.Now at this stage can plaintiff still file replication along with the rejoinder on next date of hearing?
P Devi
11 August 2015 at 16:18
Judge has passed order to issue Warrant of Possession to DH.
Please tell me about the following procedure after it. Also tell me about any precautions to be taken.
Udit
11 August 2015 at 15:24
Sir,
I filed a writ in the high court under article 227. The writ is related to the rent control act for determination of standard rent. In our petition in the trial court the period of expiry of lease was mentioned March, 1973 while the defendant in his w.s. mentioned it in March 2003. The trial court also held it correct that the lease was expired in 1973 but the trial court determined the rent to be payable since 2008. My question is that by mistake my lawyer mentioned in the writ that the lease expired in March 2003 and the defendant has also filed his counter in the high court. Can we now amend
sathishkumar
11 August 2015 at 10:56
any relevant citations on sc or mad hc
sathishkumar
11 August 2015 at 10:52
any relevant citations on sc or mad hc
Member (Account Deleted)
11 August 2015 at 09:25
Dear Experts,
Good Morning,
I have query with respect to gift deed.
My Grand father (Mother's father) has 5 children and my mother is the youngest of all. My grand father died intestate. My grand father has earned lot of property. This property is in the status of Joint Family Property. Recently we came to know that my mother has gifted her share to her brother's son by executing a registered gift deed but it is of a forged document since my mother signatures and signature on the gift deed were not tallying.
And till date the said joint family property has never been partitioned nor there was any family agreement and and the shares of these people have never been defined by any competent court or any document.
my query is that..
Is it possible in law that one person without knowing his share can gift the property to other, i.e., can my mother gift the property the boundaries of which are not defined? and gift the property which not subjected for partitioned?
What can be the relief in this regard?
It will be thank full if my query is resolved.
Regards
Neeharika
Munish Kumar Garg
11 August 2015 at 06:58
Hello Sir
My problem is that:-
In a eviction petition filed at the instance by the co-owner/landlord i.e. petitioner claiming personal bonafide necessity of the premises in question was controverted by the Tenant i.e. respondent no.1 and co-owner of the property i.e. respondent no.2, who is the real brother of the petitioner/landlord/co-owner, by filling their separate written statements but the co-owner, who is the real brother does not opt to put in appearance in witness-box to fortify the claim of the petitioner/landlord.
However, ld. Courts below dismissed my eviction petition only on the ground that as the consent of the other co-owner/respondent no.2 is required if he is disputing the bonafide necessity of the co-owner/landlord/petitioner.
But my submissions to this His Lordship are that as the other co-owner/respondent no.2 has not appeared in witness-box then his written statement cannot be taken against me, as he has not opted to prove his stand in witness-box.
But His Lordship observes that may be he is not opting to appear in witness-box but filling of written statement itself is sufficient to refute your claim and ordered me to cite some law on this pretext only.
So my request to all of you, please help me out in this regard.
Note:- CPC is not strictly application in Haryana Rent Laws.
Munish Garg
Advocate
M Satyanarayana
11 August 2015 at 02:48
Sir,
I filed partition suit and got my share and father share and my sister share. After preliminary decree my sister filed two forged unregistered relinquishment deed at the time of final decree .I took objections for marking the document and not to take on records. Now my sister filed four petition namely impounding for stamp duty, for sending my signature for expert handwriting, section 47 of CPC to decide in the same suit. All the petitions of my sister were dismissed in the trial court. My sister filed revision petition for the above petitions in the high court and high court allowed all petition of my sister.
thank you
M.Satyanarayan
If I want to set aside the orders should I approach the same high court or should go to supreme. What options are available to me. Please do kindly advise.
Thanking you
M.Satyanarayana
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Jurisdiction of civil court vis-a-vis national greens tribunal
Mobile Tower installed on a land in a village having population 1000 - suit filed in civil court by a group of villagers complaining that as the Tower installed in a crowded area and within 50 meters from the school, its radiation would harm the people as well as the cattle and crops - objection to jurisdiction alleging that jurisdiction of civil court is ousted by sec.14(2) of the National Greens Tribunal Act,2010. In fact, the action complained of i.e. installation of mobile tower, has not arisen from the implementation of any act comprised in schedule I of the NGT Act. What is the exact position ?