mubashir mulla
03 September 2015 at 23:16
Sir, including my father he has total six of them. Two groups of three person formed, my father died in year 2002 in our group a person was looking after all the cases. The case starts in 2003. He gave a adovacte for himself only against the three persons, remaining the two person he gave another advocate. Till dated we two dont know we haved filled an wakil patr. Today we realized that we two want to give a lawyer we came to know that we have already a lawyer. But this lawyer has not attended a single date in court when we went to him saying that we want a noc from you he said from 2003 to 2015 a ea year im looking to the case he demands a 10000 rs to give a noc. He says that we r meeting first time since 13 year. So please give us advice how to deal with this lawyer
haider
03 September 2015 at 23:12
well I have lost the paper of my ancestots land property and it is very old we have detail of my great grandfather who managed to handle it till 1960 and then we lost the paper its in hussar we don't have any details except the series of name to whom the property belonged to, how can we reclaim it ,its in hisar district and that's all we know about it ,the property which belonged to my ancestor, he was risaldar of his times so gizateer has the information of my ancestor which confirm that it belong to him ...so can u tell me the procedure of how to gain it?
mubashir mulla
03 September 2015 at 23:12
Sir, including my father he has total six of them. Two groups of three person formed, my father died in year 2002 in our group a person was looking after all the cases. The cade starts in 2003. He gave a adovacte himself against the three persons, remaining the two person he gave another advocate. Till dated we two dont know we haved filled an wakil patr. Today we realized that we teo want to give a lawyer we came to know that we have already a lawyer. But this lawyer has not attended a single date, when we went to him saying that we want a noc from you he said from 2003 to 2015 a lo year im looking to the case he demands a 10000 rs to give a noc. He says that we r meeting first time since 13 year. So please give us advice how to deal with this lawyer
sushant
03 September 2015 at 23:09
Does Central Information Comission Formed under Sec 12 of Rti act has the authority to pass judgement against Registrar of Supreme Court
Dr. Shekhar
03 September 2015 at 22:15
Is the 151 CPC application to be always supported with affidavit ? or can it be also filed without affidavit in some cases?
Anonymous
03 September 2015 at 22:02
My friend's husband having affair and beating wife not giving enough money for house expenses. Wife not working parents not financially strong. Please suggest how she can safeguard herself n kids.
rahul
03 September 2015 at 21:23
Respected Sir
Suit has been filed for declaration & possession of immovable property. There are more than one defendants in suit. Writ of Summon has been served to all the defendants four months back & court has accepted the service.
There is one Defendant Mr. A who has appeared before the court by his lawyer on last four dates along with other Defendants and other Defendants has filed their written statement in time & court has kept matter for hearing on Notice of Motion & it has been more than 140 days since summons has been served to Mr. A but till yet he has neither filed written statement nor he has asked for any time from court to file written statement. Lawyer of Mr. A is silent on written Statement.
Till date, On every date lawyer of Mr. A has said that ‘I am for the Mr. A’ except this he has not uttered any word in last four dates & these four dates has taken more than 140 days.
Hence I have decided that on the next date if MR. A do not file written Statement then I will file application to the court that no written statement order may be passed against Mr. A as time given by order 8 rule 1 to file WS has lapsed.
1. But along with this can I also pray to the court in the same application that judgment may be pronounced against Mr. A as per Order 8 Rule 10 ?
2. Whether order 9 Rule 11 can affect my prayers ? If yes, How ?
3. Am I right or what is the right course of action ?
Please guide. Thanking you.
debraj mukherjee
03 September 2015 at 20:38
Is a pillion rider in two wheeler eligible to get convention even though he does not wear helmet in west Bengal ??
In the case , The rider had helmet when the accused vehicle hit the bike. the rider died and the pillion rider had severe injuries. it is proved that the accident has occured due to the negligence of accused vehicle. thanks in advance..
rajkumar
03 September 2015 at 20:37
Hello,
I got married on 20-May-15 to my wife but she was not interested in this marriage because her parents compelled her emotionally to marry me. Finally she moved out of my house on 11-June-15 and stayed at her relatives and parents.
Wife parents informed to me to wait 60 days stating that they convince her and get back to me.
But on 02-Sep-15 she confronted in front of parents and relatives that she will will not stay with me and she will take care of herself.
Also she had given this in writing in 20 rs. stamp paper with her relatives parents signature.
What shall i need to do further? whether this is sufficient and i can go further and marry someone?
Please note we did not even touched each other. also she will not tell that their parents emotionally black mailed in court.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Moot preposition
Need Help on following case preposition
Disclaimer: All the names used and events described in this proposition are fictitious. Resemblance of any kind and magnitude to any name, person, organization or event whatsoever is purely co-incidental. This is a fictitious problem/case with the under-given fact matrix. The counsels are expected to operate within the four walls of the facts and issues raised herein.
Facts of the case are as follows:
Republic of Domalia is in its nascent stage, as it got independence from the Mandica on 15th September, 2003. Domalia was a colony for about 150 years and after getting independence it has become a country, which is wedded to core values of democracy, free and fair elections, transparency, accountability and freedom of religion. Republic of Domalia has its independent and autonomous Election Commission. Its Judiciary is also given the right to act independent of executive and given the power of judicial review. Domalia is a Union of States.
The following developments took place in the republic of Domalia, which resulted into a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court of Domalia:
1. That Parliament of Domalia enacted the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for brevity sake hereinafter referred to as RTI, Act), where every citizen was provided the right to seek information from various institutions/instrumentalities of the State of Domalia.
2. That all the three organs of the State were obligated to provide information to the citizens, if asked under application under RTI, Act.
3. That the purpose of the RTI, Act was to bring transparency and accountability in the functioning of the State apparatus.
4. That in Section 2(h) of RTI, Act the word PUBLIC AUTHORITY is defined. The Public authorities are bodies, which are obligated to provide information to the citizens. These public authorities were mandated to appoint Public Information Officers (in short PIOs) to give the information.
5. That on 1st July, 2007, Mr. Virendra Madan, Director of Public Interest Litigation Foundation, an NGO registered under the Societies Registration Act, filed an RTI application in the registry of the Supreme Court of Domalia requesting the information from the Apex Court about how many judges of the Supreme Court have submitted the details of financial assets required under the Supreme Court Resolution of 1997.
6. That the Supreme Court Resolution mandated the judges of the apex court to submit their details of the financial assets to the Chief Justice of Domalia.
7. That on 20th July, 2007, the PIO of the Supreme Court rejected the RTI application citing that Supreme Court of Domalia is not public authority under Section 2(h) of RTI, Act.
8. That Mr. Madan filed the first appeal with the First Appellate Authority in the Supreme Court. The First Appellate Authority also rejected the appeal citing the same reasons as given by the PIO.
9. That Mr. Madan approached the Central Information Commission (in short CIC) constituted under Section 12 of the RTI, Act in the second appeal provided under Section 19 of the Act on 10th August, 2007.
10. That the CIC issued notice to registry of the Supreme Court of Domalia on 18th August, 2007. The matter was heard for almost two months by the full bench of the Central Information Commission.
11. That on 30th September, 2007, the CIC decided that Supreme Court is covered under Section 2(h) of RTI, Act and it is a public authority and hence under obligation to answer the information requested by the applicant.
12. That the Registrar of Supreme Court, went to High Court of Capeh, one of the provinces of the Republic of Domalia, on 15th November, 2007 against the decision of CIC.
13. That the Supreme Court of Domalia through its Registrar pleaded in the court that office of the Chief Justice is not covered by RTI, Act and hence Chief Justice of Domalia is not obliged under the Act to disclose the requested information.
14. That the Supreme Court through its Registrar also pleaded in the High Court that Chief Justice of Domalia deals with many sensitive and secret communications from its judges, which need not be disclosed under the Act.
15. That the Supreme Court through its registrar also contended that Central Information Commission is not authorized to issue any direction as it is the interference in the exercise of its judicial powers. The Constitution of Domalia has insulated judiciary from the directions/pressures of administrative and quasi-judicial bodies and hence the decision of the CIC is beyond its jurisdiction.
16. That the High Court through its Division Bench upheld the contention of the CIC and the RTI applicant that Supreme Court is a public authority and rejected the arguments of the registrar of the Supreme Court on 20th October 2015.
17. That the Registrar of the Supreme Court filed Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court assailing the decision of the High Court of Capeh on 16 January, 2016.
18. The Supreme Court of Domalia issued notice to Central Information Commission, Mr. Virendra Madan and Government of Domalia.
Note: The Constitution and other laws of Union of Domalia are same as those of Union of India.
Taking into account various aspects of the case matrix, arguments are to be put forward from the side of both the Petitioner and the Respondents. The arguments can be made on creative lines. Pleas in addition to those set out above will be appreciated.