mahmood mithani
11 September 2024 at 14:47
Our is a housing society registered with MCS Act,1960, being a chairman of the society want to clarify if a society can charge monthly for dedicated car & bike parking charges - being a charge as a upkeep/ maintenance of car / bike parking in the building compound. i would highly appreciate if someone give legal opinion on the above thank you
Read more at: https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/ask_query.asp
irfan
11 September 2024 at 11:15
Dear Sir/Madam,
I hope this message finds you well. I resigned from my job due to a dispute over leave taken for health reasons, and I have been searching for a new job for the past two months. Unfortunately, I have not secured any employment yet and I am currently serving my last month with the company.
I have a car loan with the bank and a good credit record. However, as I will not be receiving a salary this month, I am concerned that this may negatively affect my credit score and result in recovery agents contacting me.
I would like to inquire if there is any provision to request the bank to defer my loan payments for three months. Once I secure a new job, I will be able to resume my EMI payments.
I would greatly appreciate your swift response and suggestions in this matter.
Thanks and Regards
Irfan Mulla
ashish gupta
11 September 2024 at 09:12
During the handover from the builder, we noticed discrepancies between the deed submitted to the Ghaziabad Development Authority and the actual delivery. For instance, the deed mentions 4 towers, whereas only 3 towers have been delivered. As a result, the calculation of the covered area differs from what was stated in the deed.
This raises questions about the next steps:
1. Does the builder need to submit a revised deed?
2. Should we draft a new agreement to proceed with the existing deed?
3. What potential compliance issues or challenges could arise if we move forward without modifying the deed?
Anonymous
10 September 2024 at 21:32
Hi All,
Need Suggestion on by right on my fathers self earned property. My father has 2 Land property. He has divided one Property(House between me and my brother half , half), The other property is in litigation we have won the case in lower court, now it is in high court. My father has not distributed this property. Will i get a equal share in this property as well. Plz suggest.
AJITKUMAR N PARMAR
10 September 2024 at 11:39
Sir, I am working as LDC in GOI, the post of LDC is isolated. My qualification is B.Com LL.B, In my Office the Post of Legal Assistant is vacant since 1995 to till date. Having a legal qualification, my office is utilized my service as legal assistant like court case hearing attending, filing FIR, assisting to authorized officer for power loom inspection under Implementation of Handlooms (RAP) Act’1985. During advertisement of legal assistant in my department I have applied for the post of legal assistant in 2010 with request to consider my application with apply section 6 relaxation of power as per RRs. However, the department is not put up my relaxation application on file and not submitted to higher officer for decision because my post is LDC is isolated and my application for the post of legal assistant is not considered. So then I have, file my case in CAT and order issued in favour of me. Then the department filed SCA in HC of Gujarat. The HC of Gujarat partly allowed order.
Sir, please clarify me as per HC order point No. 8, i.e. However, we direct the petitioners to examine the record for ascertaining the period for which the respondent was assigned the work of Legal Assistant, and pay him wages of the post of Legal Assistant for that period. As per this order I am entitle wage /pay of legal assistant for the whole period or for day in the period as ascertained by the department. The department ascertained the period is 04.11.1996 to 31.10.2012.
CAT, Ahmedabad Order:
The applicant had been selected as LDC, but he had the qualification of a lawyer and, therefore the department had very wisely utilized his service as legal assistant from 1996 onwards. He had been given a charge allowance of Rs. 2500/- somewhere during 2008. Apparently, from an earlier point onwards the applicant had requested for scale of pay of legal assistant, but that has not been granted on the ground that charge allowance has been given to him for performing higher responsible duties. the department also admits that his services have been utilized as legal assistant. their case is that he has not been legally appointed as legal assistant and therefore he cannot be granted the pay scale of legal assistant and, therefore contended by them that he is actually helping in the work of legal assistant and he is not actually appointed legal assistant and therefore he is not entitled for the pay scale of legal assistant. but this will not do. if the respondents were extracting the work of legal assistant, they are bound to pay for the work which he is performing. Therefore we will hold that the applicant will be entitled to the scale of pay for the work which is has been doing and not as per his appointment, which is technical in nature. Therefore it is ordered to grant him pay scale of legal assistant and to pay arrears arising thereform within three months.
2. At this point of time, the respondents raise issue regarding RR for methodology of deputation / absorption of legal assistant. there will not be any harm for the respondents either to depute or absorb him as legal assistant according to the rules and interpretation. it is crystal clear that having put the applicant to serve as legal assistant, he should have been paid wages of legal assistant. in this connection it is noted that the respondents have power to relax RR and having his services utilized, this discretion to exercise the relaxation also is very prominent.
ORAL JUDGMENT Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA) (1) RULE. Ms.Reena Kamani, learned advocate, appears and waives service of rule on behalf of the Respondent. With consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing forthwith. (2) Present petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 26.11.2015 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal wherein and whereby the O.A No.250 of 2012 filed by the Respondent Original Applicant challenging the action of non granting of pay scale of the post of Legal Assistant is allowed. (3) The facts of the present petition in nutshell are that the present Respondent was appointed as Lower Division Clerk (LDC) on 04.11.1996. It appears from the record that the petitioner authorities were taking additional services of the Respondent as Legal Assistant as he was duly qualified for the said post. The Respondent requested the authorities to absorb him in regular service as Legal Assistant by relaxing the recruitment rules as there was no other avenue of promotion available to him. Since the respondent was not considered fit for the post of Legal Assistant, he was constrained to approach the Learned Tribunal challenging the said action of the petitioner authorities. The learned Tribunal vide judgment and order dated 26.11.2016 directed the petitioner authorities to absorb the respondent original applicant as Legal Assistant and pay him wages of the said post as he had worked as such. (4) Ms. Avani S Mehta, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has vehemently submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in directing the authorities to absorb the respondent as Legal Assistant as same is de hors the recruitment rules. She has submitted that the recruitment to the post of Legal Assistant is to be made by the department as per the recommendation of Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) after following up the process for filling up the post as per the mode and method of selection/recruitment provided under the Recruitment Rules. Accordingly, an advertisement was issued for filling up the post. The application of the Respondent was scrutinized by the department, and he was found ineligible. She has submitted that in wake of the aforesaid facts the learned Tribunal could not have directed the petitioners to absorb the respondent as Legal Assistant. She has also further submitted that the learned Tribunal has fell in error by directing the petitioners to pay wages of the Legal Assistant to the Respondent, as the duties which the petitioner were discharging cannot be construed as performing the duties of Legal Assistant. No further contention is raised. (5) Ms.Reena Kamani, learned Advocate appearing for the Respondent, has submitted that the judgment and order of learned tribunal does not required interference, and the same is required to be sustained. She has submitted that the learned Tribunal is justified in giving the direction of absorbing the respondent as Legal Assistant since he was performing his duties as such since 1996. She has also vehemently submitted that action of the petitioners in not paying the wages/salary as Legal Assistant to the respondent, despite having worked as such, is illegal and arbitrary. (6) We have heard the respective advocates appearing on behalf of the parties. After careful scrutiny of the judgment delivered by the learned Tribunal and on examination of the documents on record, we are of the opinion that the direction given by the learned Tribunal for absorbing the Respondent as Legal Assistant calls for interference as the same is erroneous and against the settled legal principles of law. (7) It is undisputed fact that the department had issued an advertisement for filling up the post of Legal Assistant. The same was also circulated. The application of the respondent for appointment to the post of Legal Assistant was examined by the department, and he was found ineligible for the same. The respondent is not eligible to be appointed as Legal Assistant as he does not fulfill the eligibility criteria of “having 3 years regular service in the posts in the scale of Rs.5000-8000 or 6 years regular service in the posts in the scale of Rs.4000-7000 or equivalent. The UPSC had specifically denied any relaxation of the Recruitment Rules while examining the applications of the employees. Thus, the learned Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction in issuing the directions for absorbing the respondent de hors the Recruitment Rules. It is settled law that an employee cannot be absorbed or regularized on a post if he does not qualify for the same. Merely the respondent was assigned the work of Legal Assistant, he cannot claim the right of being absorbed/appointed to the post of Legal Assistant that too by relaxing the Rules. Hence, the aforesaid direction issued by the learned Tribunal is quashed and set aside. (8) So far as the contention of Ms.Ramani for entitlement of wages for the period the respondent worked as Legal Assistant is concerned, we find merit in the same. Learned Advocate Ms.Avani Mehta is unable to dispute the contents of Letter dated 12.11.2008 issued by the petitionerauthorities wherein it is specifically stated that services of the respondent was utilized as Legal Assistant as he possess legal qualification (LL.B), and further request was made to pay him honorarium for such service. It seems that thereafter the respondent was paid an honorarium of Rs.2,500/per year as evident from the Letter dated 20.07.2011. Thus, the respondent was only paid a meager amount of Rs.2,500/- as honorarium per year for the services rendered by him as Legal Assistant. It is undisputed fact that the post of Legal Assistant was lying vacant and the respondent used to perform duties of Legal Assistant. In our considered opinion the Respondent is entitled to wages/salary of Legal Assistant for the period he worked as such. Ms.Ramani states that the respondent was rendering his service as Legal Assistant since 1996, whereas Ms.Avani Mehta has asserted that his services were utilized as such since 2008. We would like to abstain ourselves from entering into disputed question. However, we direct the petitioners to examine the record for ascertaining the period for which the respondent was assigned the work of Legal Assistant, and pay him wages of the post of Legal Assistant for that period. The amount of honorarium granted to the Respondent shall be adjusted while computing the wages of the petitioner for period in question. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from today. (9) The petition is partly allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Sd/[ M.R.SHAH, J] Sd/[ A.S.SUPEHIA, J]
bharat khatwani
09 September 2024 at 00:48
I am interested in cases where courts have deemed legal notices baseless or frivolous due to a lack of substantive claims or clear intent to pursue legal action, resulting in adverse consequences for the issuing party. Specifically, I am looking for judgments where the court criticized or dismissed suits because of defective legal notices, particularly in tenancy or rent control matters.
If you have any references to relevant case law or judgments where courts took a strict stance against such frivolous legal notices, I would greatly appreciate your insights. I am ready to compensate for detailed references or legal research.
Thank you in advance for your help.
shyam lal
08 September 2024 at 20:10
Charges are yet to be framed in the Posco case accused is in Judicial custody for the last one year in this situation can the accused apply for bail under the present new Law.
MANOJ KUMAR aGNIHOTRI
08 September 2024 at 15:55
I want to transfer my flat in NOIDA Gateway Housing society Sector -51 NOIDA UP to My real brother in blood relation through a gift deed. Society is treating both as seller and buyer and as asking Rs 50000/- from both of us. Please advice what are rules & charges legally in this case.
Ashok Kumar
08 September 2024 at 12:34
Respected Law Professionals,
I would like to know whether the personal appearance of the Complainant is required in a Complaint filed u/s 200 CrPC before a Ld. Judicial Magistrate? Kindly specify whether the appearance of the complainant would be required in the pre-trial stage, trial stage, or any specific points in time in either. I have heard conflicting advice from several advocates. Some who say that the personal appearance required for each and every hearing (though exemption applications can be submitted u/s 205 CrPC). Whereas others have informed me that personal appearance is only required for the personal statement and cross-examination (which is to take place twice i.e. at both the pre-trial and trial stages).
I would appreciate a definitive response so that I can understand whether it makes sense to file the Complaint whose jurisdiction is in another state. It seems that it would be a great hindrance to the service of justice if the personal appearance were to be required for each any every hearing - as the Complainant would have to strongly reconsider whether to even file the Complaint due to the severe obstacle/expense of repeated personal appearances.
Note that I have already exhausted the options of filing of Complaint before the police who did not properly investigate the matter and also the filing of an application u/s 156(3) CrPC, which directed the police to reinvestigate the matter, but the outcome was the same.
Thank you in advance for your time and response.
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Nach dishonour defense
I have an NACH dishonour case filed against me for the dishonor case in Dec 2022.
The goods in question were purchased in Sept 2021.
Proceedings have been going on from past 1 year (2023-2024) wherein we have been through mediation but no solution was found.
In this regard, the complainant has given an offer of 75% of amount in question to settle the case. However, I believe we might have some credible argument which may be presented that might cause the case to be decided in my favour.
If possible, need some guidance from advocate who can guide if those argument are infact credible or not.
Argument:
1. NACH procedural guidelines
Complainant has informed that the electronic funds were initiated in accordance with the relevant procedural guidelines issued by the system provider.
In this regard, as per National Automated Clearing House (NACH) procedural guidelines V6:
a. As on page 45, corporates “Ensure that the customer is made aware of the purpose for which they are executing the mandate” - NOT DONE
b. As on page 45, corporates “If the mandate is taken in advance, the customer should be notified before deposition to the bank. If the customer is not aware then he may deny signing the mandate in response to confirmation calls of his / her bank” – Customer not notified by corporate.
c. As on page 45, Sponsor Bank “Banks should have internal controls in place to ensure that no duplicate mandates are processed in MMS” - The mandates for the invoices in question were processed in Sept 2021, then somehow mandates were again processed in Dec 2022?
2. As per agreement between parties for Dispute resolution
a. As per one clause, Distributor to handover signed cheques and authorize company to complete such cheques with amount as per the payment advice issued to distributor giving the details of the purchase price…. However, in the present case, NACH/ACH/ECS are in question wherein company has failed to provide the payment advice to the distributor. The last payment advice was in September 2021, whereas NACH was mandated on Dec 2022, a period of 14-15 months. As per agreement, maximum credit period was 10 days not 14-15 months. Therefore these mandates are illegal.
b. As per one clause, “any dispute or difference which arise by and between parties hereto relating to or arising out of this Agreement, unless decided by mutual agreement of the parties, be referred to Arbitrators (one each to be appointed by the parties to the dispute) or the third Arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for the time being in force or any amendment thereto. The Award passed by the Arbitrators shall be final arid binding on all the Parties to the dispute”. Here no arbitration was done, distributor was not given chance to make the claims.