jawahar
06 April 2009 at 22:59
Dear Learned Friends,
In a workmen's Compensation case the Deputy Commissioner of Labour awarded compensation. In that the case of the management is that the deceased was not at all a workmen under the management. In a criminal case filed by the Inspector of factories with respect to that accident, the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate gave a fining that the deceased was not a workmen under the management. Hence the Criminal case was dismissed. That judgement was marked in the compensation case.
My question is whether the Deputy Commissioner of Labour is bound to follow that judgement or not?
The deputy commissioner of labour being a quasi judicial authority has bind by the judicial findings or not? Pls answer with citation as far as possible.
allurisivajiraju
06 April 2009 at 20:58
Respected Seniors,
There are two searate cases U/S 138 and 142 of N.I. Act between the same parties one case cheque amount of Rs. 6,00,000-00 ie. case 'A'and another case cheque amount is Rs. 7,00,000-00 ie. Case 'B'.
In the case 'A' the Complainant filed his cheif examination affidavit as PW-1. There in he prayed for marking of cheque for an amount of Rs. 6,00,000-00 as Exibit P-1.
But Court marked by mistakenly Rs. 7,00,000-00 cheque as exibit P-1 in case 'A'. Actually Rs. 7,00,000-00 cheque is belongs to case 'B'.
Now what are the option available to the Comlainant to correct the above mistake. Is it curable one or not.
Thanking you in Advance.
allurisivajiraju
06 April 2009 at 20:56
Respected Seniors,
There are two searate cases U/S 138 and 142 of N.I. Act between the same parties one case cheque amount of Rs. 6,00,000-00 ie. case 'A'and another case cheque amount is Rs. 7,00,000-00 ie. Case 'B'.
In the case 'A' the Complainant filed his cheif examination affidavit as PW-1. There in he prayed for marking of cheque for an amount of Rs. 6,00,000-00 as Exibit P-1.
But Court marked by mistakenly Rs. 7,00,000-00 cheque as exibit P-1 in case 'A'. Actually Rs. 7,00,000-00 cheque is belongs to case 'B'.
Now what are the option available to the Comlainant to correct the above mistake. Is it curable one or not.
Thanking you in Advance.
M. Sahul Hameed
06 April 2009 at 19:57
Can a court auction purchaser defend the petition filed by the third party, who is having some interest over the property under order 21 rule 64. what are the defences available on the part of court auction purchaser. Is there any rulings infavour of court auction purchaser.
dhiraj choudhary
06 April 2009 at 16:23
can court consider the merits of the main case also while deciding the application for condonation of delay.if not then plz. give me some judgments as i m in dire need of them
Sreenivas
06 April 2009 at 16:00
A FLAT WHICH IS FOR SALE IS IN THE NAME OF MOTHER AND HER SON.THE SON HAPPENS TO BE IN UNITED STATES.THE POA WILL BE IN THE NAME OF HIS SISTER. HOW DO I GET POA FROM THE SON AND STEPS AND NORMAL TIME THAT IT WOULD TAKE...
Rama Verma
06 April 2009 at 15:37
what are the duties of director when company is filing bankcrupty according to indian law. and general duties of director.
kanwar Lal
06 April 2009 at 15:33
can we file complaint u/s 420 against the person who issued cheque and same was dishonourd due to reason "signature differ" along with complaint u/s 138 of NI ACT.
Jitendra Raval
06 April 2009 at 14:51
In my case the complianant is not the 'Holder in due course' of the cheques numbers involved the the complaint filed against the accused. The Holder of the insrument was not entitled to fill up his name or alter the basic of the cheque.
Kinly quote the caselaws where the accused was released because of above mentioned reason.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
UTTAR PRADESH Stamp Act
Dear Members,
Can anybody tell me IN 1909 HOW MUCH STAMP WAS REQUIRED FOR AGREEMENT IN GENERAL IN UTTAR PRADESH?
EARLY REPLY IS HIGHLY APPRECIATED.
SHYAM JI SRIVASTAVA
ADVOCATE
KANPUR