SP Verma
02 November 2017 at 15:21
Respected Sir, The applicatioin of plaintiff for permanent injunction under O39 R1&2 was rejected as the incredients of three aspects i.e.prima facie, balance of convenience and irreparable loss were not found in his favour. Simulataneously, the counter claim of defendant for temporary injunction was also rejected by the same court on the plea that no permanent injunction was prayed for though the defendnat has good title in his favour. Kindly suggest me whether I can submit now the application for permanent injunction against plaintiff. If so under which sections please.
I shall be highly grateful for your kind advice.
Thanks and regards,
SP Verma
anwer
02 November 2017 at 12:34
we are Muslim family from Mumbai . My sister is living with me since 10 yrs with her 2 sons (16 and 22 yrs ) in abroad after separated from her husband and their family .she didn't divorced legally from him.she living separate bcs her husband told cant look after her and kids and she working here in abroad and looking after their studies and lively hood.recently her husband got second marriage with another lady and living Mumbai. my sisters father in law have properties in Mumbai but nothing given to his children . As of this no properties in the name of my brother in law. below are my queries
1. Now her father in law have some soft corner on my sister and kids and ready to give a property in kids and her name. How can we make a valued document for that?. as a GIFT or will?
2. How can we file a case on her husband for remuneration for her and kids .
seshadri vikrala
02 November 2017 at 11:46
HONOURABLE SIR SENDING THIS MATTER WITH A GREAT EXPECTATIONS THAT YOU HAVE TIME TO READ IN SEQUENCE BUT NOT TO DISCARD PLEASE.
IN RAILWAY BOARD RPF THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF ENTRY INTO GROUP A CADRE SERVICE SELECTION PROCESS...
DIRECT UPSC SELECTION PROCESS AS ASSISTANT SECURITY COMMISSIONER,RPF, THEY GET THEIR NEXT HIGHER RANK PROMOTION ON COMPLETION OF THREE YEARS CONTINUOUS SERVICE AS ASC. REMAINING,EAR MARKED QUOTA, FIRST PHASE, THEY SELECT INSPECTORS TO ASC POST, KEEP QUITE ON DPCs, MAKE THEM AS AD HOC ASCs to work for several years. ACTUALLY
40/50% SELECTION PROCESS IS TO BE DONE THROUGH DPC/UPSC, WHICH IS DONE NOT BEING CARRIED OUT BY RAILWAY BOARD RPF AS PER PROVISIONS OF THE LAW,THE RULES, JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS, BUT THEY CONDUCT DPCs AT EASE AS PER THEIR CHOICE. IN RPF DIRECTORATE,DG,RPF IS FROM IPS CADRE SERVICE RANK OFFICERS ON DEPUTATION AND COULD NOT SUCCEEDED IN SET RIGHTING THE INSIDE VICIOUS CYCLE IN CONDUCTING DPCs IN TIME SCHEDULE BY TRYING TO GET FACTUAL INFORMATION ON RECORD... NOT A SOLUTION WAS SOLVED SO FAR AT HIS OPENNESS DIRECTIONS AND ORDERS SO FAR.. ALL CASES DECIDED BY COURT ORDERS ALSO NOT HONOURED EXCEPT ONE CASE WHEREIN, THEY IMPLEMENTED HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA IN THE WP FILED BY ONE BHUPATHI ALIAS B. MOHAN, THE SLP FILED BY THEM DISMISSED.. HEREIN THE CRUX OF THE LAW RULES AND SPECIFIC JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS COMES THROUGH.. THEY GAVE DEEMED PROFORMA, PRESUMPTIVE PROMOTION TO ALL RETIRED SA GRADE DSCs to DIG SCALE OFFICERS, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NOT PETITIONER S IN THE WP, LEAST ,THEY DID NOT EVEN APPLIED FOR DEEMED PROMOTION ORDERS AT PAR WITH JUNIORS BEFORE SUPERANNUATION, THEREBY, ALL THE RETIRED SA GRADE OFFICERS IN RPF WERE GIVEN PENSION FIXATION BENEFITS AT PAR WITH JUNIORS...HERE , THE SAME IS OUTRIGHTLY REJECTED BY RAILWAY BOARD RPF...
DEPARTMENT PROMULGATED RULES BUT ALMOST KEPT ASIDE IN THIS MATTER.
THEY GIVE PROMOTION TO INSPECTORS/GROUP A CADRE SERVICE RANK AS ASCs/GROUP A CADRE POST...JUNIOR ADMIN SCALE...NO GROUP B CADRE POST S IN RPF SINCE 1983...
THE ATTACHMENT OF LITIGATION IS THAT THE ADHOC SYSTEM CONTINUANCE GOES ON AND DEPARTMENTAL ASCs WITHOUT REGULARISATION RETIRE,THEN COMFORT MIND DEVELOPMENT IS THE CRUX OF THE DAY,YEAR, RPF CONDUCT DPC ,ALL PREVIOUS YEARS VACANCIES ARE FILLED WITH JUNIORS IN THE PLACE OF SENIOR S..
BY THE TIME... THIS STOP GAP FILLING UP OF PROMOTEES AS ADHOC ASCs CONTINUES BY RAILWAY BOARD RPF WITHOUT HOLDING TIME SCHEDULE DPCs, SAY 2-5YEARS , DIRECT ASCs SHALL GET THEIR NEXT HIGHER RANK PROMOTION SA GRADE, AS DSC, BY VIRTUE OF VACANCY,SAME DECLINED TO DEPARTMENT ASCs ONLY ON PLEA THAT THEY ARE ON ADHOC HENCE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ACTUAL PROMOTION...
THIS CAPTIONED POSITION IN RAILWAY BOARD RPF IS GOING ON SINCE DECADES,
ALL EFFORTS MADE LOST IN THE WIND AND UNDER THE BUREAUCRACY'NAME SYSTEMATIC HANDLING IN RAILWAY BOARD
... COURT ORDERS PRONOUNCED AGAIN AND AGAIN ARE HAVING NO EFFECT ON RAILWAY BOARD,RPF DIRECTORATE.
ALL GONE WITH THE WIND...LAWS, RULES , JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS ARE FOR NAME SAKE...TO THEM.
WILL THIS PATHETIC CONDITIONS OF THE SERVING ADHOC ASCS AND RETIRED ASCS BE SOLVED OR NOT... WHETHER THE RAILWAY BOARD RPF IS ADOPTING IT'S OWN COURSE OF DUAL SETS OF RULES AND DETHROWING THE JUDICIARY ORDERS AND ALSO THE LAW RULES, CAN'T THIS BE TAKEN AS CONTEMPTUOUS ACT OF THE RAILWAY BOARD RPF, EXAMPLE, IN RECENT SONY VERGHESE CASE ..SLP 1663 OF 2013FILED BY UOI& RAILWAYS DISMISSED BY HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT IN APRIL 2017 WITH SPECIAL DIRECTIONS BY UPHOLDING THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS ORDERS, BUT SO FAR NO ACTION SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN POURED ON RECORD...
2) MY PROPOSAL SENT TO ALL...
I PRAY TO CONSIDER TO REVIEW THE ORDERS IN FAVOUR OF ADHOC SYSTEM CONTINUANCE FOR SEVERAL YEARS WITHOUT CONDUCTING DPCS, DUE TO WANTON DELAYED TACTICAL DEALINGS OF RAILWAY BOARD RPF...NOT ON EMPLOYEES FAULT...WHY THE EMPLOYEES PENSIONERS ARE MADE TO SUFFER...HOW TO END THIS TYPE OF FLYOVER JUMPING RULES ADOPTED BY RAILWAY BOARD RPF...
MY CONSIDERED SUGGESTIONS MADE...TO RESERVE ... QUOTA OF%IN NEXT HIGHER RANK PROMOTION FROM ASC RPF TO THAT OF DSC,RPF...
THIS ACTION OF SHALL SETRAIGHT AWAY SETUP AND STOP THEIR UNDERGROUND FAVOURITISM, THUS, EVERYTHING IN RPF ON THE ISSUE SHALL STAND SETTLED..
IF THE DPCs are held in later years and if the EMPLOYEE S PENSIONERS are forced to retire without any further promotions, but for the mistake of the ADMINISTRATION'S FAULT, errors,etc... their names should be considered for placement in the DPCs PANELS ACCORDING TO INTAKE QUOTA OF VACANCY OF PREVIOUS YEARS AND they must be given DEEMED PROMOTION at par with the JUNIOR before superannuation as per SENIORITY and pension benefits be given...
Only thing that you are all requested to kindly consider TO READ and publish in your esteemed papers and MAGAZINE s...
NB..I HAVE GIVEN LOTS OF CASES AS PER RECORD WHEREIN THE RAILWAY BOARD RPF PONDERED THEIR FAVOURITISM, EVEN THROUGH DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT AND APPLICATION OF RULES JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS, ORDERS AS PER THEIR CHOICE SELECTION PROCESS....
Anonymous
02 November 2017 at 11:27
Dear All,
I have worked for Limited company for 4 years 5 months am I eligible to get Graduity or not.
Kindly help me in resolving above query.
Please do the needful.
Thank you
Anonymous
02 November 2017 at 10:24
I was on call with my Wife in Feb this year and she said ill about my religion and others as well. She threaten me as well that her family member will see my faith. I already filed FIR against her U/S 156(3) and section are IPC 420,406,307,324,323,341,34,506,120b. There is no police action against her and her family till date. I filed 6 RTI but only one have been answered and it states that case is under Investigation. I filed FIR in 16-3-2017 So based on this Phone commnication can I file IPC 500,506,34,34,120 against her and family once again. She had managed police and police wants me to comprise and close FIR. PS: She have not filed 498a on me till date. So the qestion is can I file another FIR VIA 15693) on her?
N. SENTHIL KUMAR
02 November 2017 at 09:36
Respected Sir(s),
I served in central paramilitary force with 09 years and 09 months complete service and further joined in PSU with Technical resignation. I made so many correspondence for granting of pension to service rendered in central paramilitary but they did not released pensionary benefits till date. Please suggest for availing pensionary benefits.
Rajesh
02 November 2017 at 03:02
me and my 3 brother(x,y,z) is partner in shop in Mumbai in pagadi system property , before 30 years my brother(X) is unemployed so me and 2 brother (y,z) is thinking that he(X) will continue in shop but now my uncle(X) is passed away and another 2 uncle(y,z) is continuing the shop and it will not give any money and said that you have no part in this property. I am so confused what we can do? Can I sealed the shop ?
Member (Account Deleted)
02 November 2017 at 01:17
In one suit, Plaintiff moved an application for Temporary Injunction at the time of filing of suit , few Defendants gave say. Many Defendants summons were not served at that point, after a brief argument. Hon. Court was pleased to pass order that "Temporary Injunction application will be heard after serving of all summons as there is no urgency in the matter"
There was a delay for few years for serving of summons (Reason better not specify here).
In mean time Plaintiff died her legal heirs were taken on record within the period of limitation in the suit. Plaint was amended legal heirs were taken on record.
Now Temporary Injunction application is on the name of deceased Plaintiff, Names were not taken on record in this application by Plaintiff legal heir.
Those defendants who gave say to Temporary Injunction failed to give written statement to the Plaint,
Some people have the habit to state in the say of Temporary injunction that it should be also considered as written Statement and they also give one Pursis to Hon. Court . Now those Defendant Adv have failed to do both neither wrote such thing in say nor gave Pursis ,
1) Now I feel that application for the temporary injunction is abated, Whether it is correct?
2) And whether rules of abatement which are applicable to suit are also applicable for such applications in the suit (restricted to application)?
3) When Temporary Injunction application abates (If abates as per my understanding ) then what is the legal status for say to Temporary Injunction, then what is the validity of such say in the suit .
4) Now the validity of Say to the temporary Injunction has become the center point of the case because other defendants failed to give WS nor say to Temporary Injunction.
5) I need clarification for Say to the temporary injunction in such situation and whether Hon. Court can discard say using 151 CPC as Temporary injunction application is abated or Say looses its whole relevance ? or any other legal interpretation in such situation?
(Please note this is not academic query, I need to take stand in this matter against Defendants Adv)
DKJ
02 November 2017 at 00:48
It has been clearly detected that my signatures are forged on policy proposal forms of life insurance policy which I bought in 2009. I bought this to the notice of my insurer and the insurer is maintaining absolute silence about signature forgery. It is clearly evident that my signatures are forged at 2 places. I have filed a case in district consumer forum. I guess consumer forums don't decide on cases on signature forgery. There is one more ground of tampering the proposal form without authentication (absence of counter-signature) on which my case in consumer forum may stand. Regarding signature forgery, what action can I take ? Can I get a forensic test done at my cost for forged signatures and then submit the forensic report in court ? In future, if the insurer wants to settle the matter out of court, can I withdraw my case ? Against whom I should file a case in court ? The insurance agent who sold me the policy in 2009 is no more employed with my insurer.
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Defamation by ex girl friend
Hi
I had a sexual relationship with one of my colleague. My girl friend came to know about it and we had a break up. I had clearly told her that I had affiar with that colleague only.
Now my ex gf is reaching out to my other female colleagues and asking them if I had any relationship with them. This is causing problems for me at work. I am not able to work with any of my female colleagues.
Can this be considered as defamation? Can I sue her in this case?