Anonymous
20 May 2011 at 20:13
Respected sir,
1)In DV case charges are being decided before interim order or after interim.
2)whether charges are being decided in DV case or case runs according to the wish of the Applicant.
3)If cause of action is absent in the main application of the Applicant can the lawyer Respondent can appeal in trial court to dismiss the case.
4) Or even in absence of cause of action case continues to its logical end.
5) Is trial court magistrate having power to dismis the case when find absence of cause of action.
6) DV case is neither retroactive nor considered considered past events. if it proves then magistrate considered this point or runs the case.
guidance helps to understand things which are present in the so mentioned DV case.
thanks in advance
Anonymous
20 May 2011 at 20:11
Respected sir,
1)In DV case charges are being decided before interim order or after interim.
2)whether charges are being decided in DV case or case runs according to the wish of the Applicant.
3)If cause of action is absent in the main application of the Applicant can the lawyer Respondent can appeal in trial court to dismiss the case.
4) Or even in absence of cause of action case continues to its logical end.
5) Is trial court magistrate having power to dismis the case when find absence of cause of action.
6) DV case is neither retroactive nor considered considered past events. if it proves then magistrate considered this point or runs the case.
guidance helps to understand things which are present in the so mentioned DV case.
thanks in advance
Anonymous
20 May 2011 at 20:07
Respected sir,
1)In DV case charges are being decided before interim order or after interim.
2)whether charges are being decided in DV case or case runs according to the wish of the Applicant.
3)If cause of action is absent in the main application of the Applicant can the lawyer Respondent can appeal in trial court to dismiss the case.
4) Or even in absence of cause of action case continues to its logical end.
5) Is trial court magistrate having power to dismis the case when find absence of cause of action.
6) DV case is neither retroactive nor considered considered past events. if it proves then magistrate considered this point or runs the case.
guidance helps to understand things which are present in the so mentioned DV case.
thanks in advance
Anonymous
20 May 2011 at 16:04
I ve filed a DV case on my husband residing in Oman & his brothers in india. Court has issued summons on them, the summon to my husband was sent thro' the indian Embassy in oman twice. We have not received any acknowledgement on the summons served in oman hence we are stuck and not able to proceed with the case. Kindly help.
Anonymous
20 May 2011 at 13:37
What is a citizen's right, when the police seizes the passport of a citizen upon court's order, issues a receipt for the same, but never deposits the passport to the said court and then loses the passport of that citizen, and then agrees to release a letter to the citizen that they have messed up.
In the meanwhile the passport is expired by over 4 years.
Will the regional passport authority accept the police letter and agree to renew the passport or there will be further complications in this issue.
A detailed expert advice will be appreciated at the earliest.
Thanks in advance for all expert advice.
Best regards,
The aggrieved party
BAALASUBRAMANNYAMM
20 May 2011 at 13:00
Respected Experts,
“A” is running Training/Coaching Centre and “B” wants to join as Trainee. The course of training is 3 months. Training fees is fixed @ Rs. 50,000/-. As a matter of fact, no payment is expecting from “B” at the initial stage. “B” has to pay the said sum as and when he joined in a company/Institution.
As a security purpose, “B” has to produce his father or mother as a surety/guarantor, who in turn should give a Cheque (date not to be mentioned) for the said sum. The aim of “A” for taking an undated Cheque is, in case, “B” fails to pay the said fees either partly or totally, even though he placed in a company, even after one year, “A” should be able to get the same from the guarantor by filing a Cheque bounce case. So both of them are executing a “Agreement for Training”.
I herewith mentioned some main points covering the above aspects. Plz. Verify whether the points can help us in future in succeeding a Cheque bounce case, in case of filing against the “B” and his guarantor.
1. The Surety/Guarantor agreed to deposit a cheque bearing No……………………..drawn on……………… Bank, Hyderabad for Rs. 50,000/- issued in the name of “A” towards security deposit.
2. ”B” and his Surety/Guarantor are authorised”A” to deposit the above said cheque, in case if “B” fails to pay the above Training fees, even after placement in any company/Institution.
3. “A” should give two weeks advance notice, in case “A” wants to deposit the above said cheque and communicate the same in writing to “B” and his surety, in case “B” fails to pay the above said Training fees either partly or totally.
Plz. Suggest me suitably.
Anonymous
20 May 2011 at 12:53
Counsels,
What is the procedure to be followed by a magistrate in a petition u/s 156(3) with a prayer to direct the respondent police to register FIR.
Police have filed a report (not to the magistrate) with registeing any FIR and closed the complaint and sent a report u/s 168 of CR.PC.
Will the magistrate proceed to treat the petition as complaint u/s 200 and examine the petitioner or will he only direct police to register FIR if there is a prima facie case rejecting the 168 report of the police. The complainant want the case to prosecuted by the State.
Please clarify, Thanks.
Anonymous
20 May 2011 at 10:08
Is it true, that during trail U/s.138 of NI Act 1881, the accused may take exemption and remain absent during whole period of trail till the verdict. The Pleader/advocate of accused may represent himself infavour of accused and conduct the case.
I seek your expert advise & more focus on the same.
regards,
Sudhakar Yeradkar.
Anonymous
20 May 2011 at 08:01
SIR,
ONE PERSON IS AN OFFICER IN RBI. HE IS A DIRECTOR OF A PVT LTD CO. A BIG LOSS MAKING FIRM SINCE 1995.HE HAS BEEN LAUNCHING AND ATTENDING COURT CASES SINCE THEN.
MY QUESTION IS IF ANY GOVT EMPLOYEE CAN CONTINUE TO BE MAIN DIRECTOR OF A COMMERCIAL CO. LIKE THIS.
CAN HE CONTINUE TO LAUNCH CASES AGAINST OTHERS.
WHAT IS THE LEGAL POSITION
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
under section 138 of N.I. Act
1.whether a frsh complaint is binding against the pending Insolvency petition its a debtor filing Insolvency petition ?
2. I want citation for sec 138 is does not file any complainant against debtor IP holder ?
3. In that basic the debtor IP holder had filed any civil case against complainant ?