Jithendra.H.J
04 March 2009 at 20:33
it is reported in ILR 1996 KAR (Sujatha Vs Indain Bank, and it is held that if oonce case posted for judgment, no application to recall or advance hearing for any other purpose.
it means onece the case is posted for judgment it cannot reopened, is there any recent judgment that the case can be reopended?
Vikas Kr. Sinha
04 March 2009 at 18:08
If a cheque is dishonoured due to "Stopped Payment" by the drawer.
Whether in such case complaint under section 138 of N.I. Act is maintainable?
If yes, please give any ruling.
SARAVANAN.R
04 March 2009 at 17:09
Sir,
In I.D ACT, prohibition of Strikes and Lockout is mentined in the relevant sections. My question is why this two notices are necessary.
Please tell me whether I am correct in assuming that In six weeks notice, date is not specified. In 14 days notice, date and time is clearly specified.
Please feel free to answer this.
SARAVANAN.R
04 March 2009 at 17:09
Sir,
In I.D ACT, prohibition of Strikes and Lockout is mentined in the relevant sections. My question is why this two notices are necessary.
Please tell me whether I am correct in assuming that In six weeks notice, date is not specified. In 14 days notice, date and time is clearly specified.
Please feel free to answer this.
sairasiddiqui
04 March 2009 at 14:21
Differnce B/W Memorandum of Understanding & Agreement
Regards
Saira Bano Siddiqui
Student CA-Final
Suresh
04 March 2009 at 12:48
X is the manufacturer and Y is one of his distributors. Owing to payment issue X assigns his trademark to Y to settle his payment on 2006. Y has also filed the T.M.16 and T.M. 24 before the Trademark Registry for the recordal change proprietorship. Later Y came to know that X has again assigned the same trademark to another distributor “Z” on 2008 to settle the payment.
The assignment made on 2006 to Y was on stamp papers, whereas the assignment made on 2008 to Z was on white papers. But in the affidavit before the Trademark registry X has mentioned that Y has fraudulently obtained the assignment without his knowledge, hence the said assignment would not withstand and only the assignment made to Y is valid.
Other facts:
X has also defrauded another distributor, and C.P has been filed for liquidation of assets of X’s Company and the said suit is pending before the court.
So, my query is
Can X revoke his assignment by way of affidavit filed before the Trademark Registry?
Whether the later assignment to Z is valid?
What remedy available to “Z” against of X?
Can Y file suit against X for making such affidavit before the Trademark Registry?
Your Valuable opinion is much awaited
Thanks and regards
Suresh
V. Mohankumar
03 March 2009 at 16:57
A rented flat (taken on rent in the 1940s) is converted into an ownership flat by an agreement between the landlord and the then existing tenant in the year 1992. As per the agreement, the existing tenant is offered a new flat in the newly reconstructed building, without any monetary consideration. One of the clauses of the agreement states that the tenant will not forego his right over the tenanted flat till he is able to occupy a flat allotted to him in the reconstructed building. However, he expires, intestate, in a hospital while he was staying on the tenanted flat, just 5 months before the old building was broken up. The deceased is survived by 3 daughters (all married and settled separately) and a son (who is also married but staying with his father).
On completion of construction, the son got to occupy the new flat. However, in the light of what is stated above, who actually is eligible for ownership of the flat since the deceased expired intestate; do the married daughters have any right over the new flat? If the son (since expired) has the right of ownership, will his legal heirs have the right to sell the flat without permission from his sisters?
ram
03 March 2009 at 16:53
Sir, It is informed that one employee asked some information (Pertaining to Sevice Book, Promotion File) of same department under right information Act. It is reasonable / Right such informaition without consent of the effected person for giveing. What is the procidure followed by the competent authority for issue the information
Thank Q ( Need speedy Help this Matter)
V.Raghavan
03 March 2009 at 14:20
Kindly inform me the role of the Commr of Labour in the cociliation proceedings? Can he pass an order without hearing the side of the management? Having received the full and final settlement a worker lodeged complaint with the Commr.of Labour seeking relief for further money or reinstatement. The company is a very small with 3 workers. The worker was in practise of joining and leaving the company thrice after getting settlment dues. Since it is very diffcult to get a trained worker the management was also in practise of appointing him often as a fresh one each time. In the last time he voluntarily left the company got the settlement amout and after trying employment somewhereelse and not found hence he lodged the complaint. Advice me is it to show all the records to this conciliation officer? Can he empowered to pass an order in this regard? If order passed how to challange it? To my satisfaction i feel the worker is paid more than he worked. The company is not under the purview of any of the labour act. Advice me.
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Civil Procedure code
A case is filed uunder section138 of NI Act, the accused examined himself as DW1, he filed witness list, the court ordered to take hand summons to the witness, the hand summons was not prepared in the office, but the court after two hearing closed the defence side evidence posted for arguments stating that the accused neglected to recieve the hand summons, acutallyit was not fault of the accused, the accused preffered revision before the District Court. the complaint intentionally evading the sevice of notice to get the complaint disposed off.
what is your suggestions to the accused.