LexLords NRI Legal Services Fees By NRI Legal Services LexLords

NRI legal services - https://lexlords.com/title-search/; Despite withdrawal of their offer, the same was accepted. Learned counsel urged that the first and foremost requirement for filing an application under Section 11 of the Act is that there has to be in existence a valid and enforceable arbitration agreement and such agreement, according to him, should be reduced in writing and lastly, it must be signed by the parties to the application as provided under Section 2(h) read with Section 7(4) of the Act.

It is obvious, that the aforesaid extra-judicial confession was made as is apparent from the statement of the appellant (extracted hereinabove) to save himself from any adverse, physical handling by the investigating authorities. In some cases, offers, despite withdrawal thereof, were accepted after the expiry of the operation period of the Scheme. It has also been contended on behalf of the land-owners that the land is lying unutilized till date and, in fact, in a recent meeting of the Government convened by the Chief Secretary of the State it was expressed that the impugned acquisition need not be proceeded with any further nAct having been subsequently waived and the objections of the land-owners having NRI legal services (read the full info here) been heard, the State could not have, once again, reverted to invoke the provisions of Section 17(1) of the L.

The learned Attorney-General drew our attention to a number of cases for the proposition that unless there was a direct infringement of the fundamental right of the shareholders it was not open to them to take advantage of the breach of a fundamental right of the company. In this regard, it has also been contended that taking over of possession of the land on 17th March, 2016 was without adequate notice and furthermore that the possession taken over was only symbolic/paper possession.

Having considered the submissions made on both sides, we are of the opinion that there is no error committed by the MRTP Commission in rejecting the Claim of the Appellant. In these wide terms I am unable to accede' to this proposition. It is clear from the facts of the present case that the Appellant has made out a case of theft without a forcible entry. It might be difficult to identify who had actually borne the burden but such verification would definitely assist the Revenue in finding out whether the manufacturer or buyer who makes an application for refund are being unjustly enriched.

Another submission which remains to be considered is the requirement of verification to be done for the purpose of finding out who ultimately bore the burden of excise duty. It is also not a matter of dispute, that R. Alagurajan " PW12 was the then Village Administrative Officer. The case of the Appellant is that forcible entry is not required for a claim to be made under the policy. It was urged that since the respondents have not been able to prove this basic requirement of law, the application filed by the respondents under Section 11 of the Act was liable to be dismissed for want of non-compliance of the requirement of Section 2(b) and 2(h) read with Section 7 of the Act.

Alagurajan " PW12, the Village Administrative Officer, effectuated the aforesaid object, by accompanying the appellant to the police station, and ensuring his arrest at the hands of Arumugam " PW20. Harchand Rai Chandan Lal (supra) read as under: 14) In the second place, learned senior counsel submitted that when admittedly parties to the application, who are beneficiaries of the Trust, did not sign the Trust Deed, they could not be held parties to such Trust Deed.

, and therefore went on to argue that it is obvious that packing material used to market tea would necessarily be included. Before the Punjab and in case of nationalized banks where there was no provision to withdraw (and in fact the Scheme forbade withdrawal), the withdrawal must be effected prior to acceptance by the Bank. If it is not possible to identify the person/persons who have borne the duty, the amount of excise duty collected in excess will remain in the fund which will be utilized for the benefit of the consumers as provided in Section 12-D.

Shri Kavin Gulati also specifically pointed out the Tea Marketing Control Order, 2003 made under Section 30 of the Tea Act, 1953 in which, manufacturer has been defined as a person who also produces value added products commercially known as tea, that is packet tea, tea box, etc. The provisions of the policy in United India Insurance Co. Mellon(1), and is in these terms: In my opinion, the correct rule on this point has been stated in Willoughby, at page 20, on the authority of the decision in chusetts v.

Writ petitions were filed in various High Courts to challenge the acceptance of the employees' applications by the banks despite their withdrawal. Possession of the land prior to the passing of the Award could not have been taken and that too by payment of 80% of the estimated compensation at a point of time subsequent to the taking over of possession. A plain reading of the policy would show that a forcible entry should precede the theft, and unless they are proved, the claim cannot be accepted.

Following the well- accepted principle that a contract of insurance which is like any other commercial contract should be interpreted strictly, we are of the opinion that the policy covers loss or damage by burglary or house breaking which have been explained as theft following an actual, forcible and violent entry from the premises.