Difference between revisions of "The Definitive Guide To Lawyer In Chandigarh"

From DIGIMAT Digital Learning Platform - Knowledge Base
Jump to: navigation, search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
−
86 hectares for commercial purposes, subject to the general provisions of the Regulation, 1966 and the Rules made thereunder. Mukul Rohatgi, the learned Attorney General, appearing on behalf of the Review Petitioners-Appellants urged this Court to consider reviewing the impugned judgment by placing strong reliance upon the lease deed dated 01. The reference to the policy and its terms and conditions may be expressed in the proposal or Advocates, [http://lawyerchandigarh.com/how-punjab-and-haryana-exercises-its-inherent-powers-under-section-482-of-crpc/ find out here], the cover note or even in the letter of Advocates ([http://nri-world.com find out here]) acceptance including the cover note.<br><br>The learned Attorney General submits that it is a privilege conferred upon Respondent no. Thereis therefore much to be said for the contention ofthe appellants that the proceedings evidenced by Exhibits A-1 and A-1(1) were collusive in character. The entire outlet system upto the individual outlets have been put in place as already stated above. The appellants were called upon thereby, to remove the illegal and unauthorized constructions in violation of the provisions of Act 1965 and Act 1966 within 30 days of the receipt of the notice failing which it was conveyed, that the same would be demolished by the Nagar Panchayat.<br><br>Documents like the proposal, cover note and the policy are commercial documents and to interpret them commercial habits and practice cannot altogether be ignored. It should also be  Advocates, [http://acquitlaw.com/ find out here], mentioned that at the hearing of the petition, no evidence was adduced by the mortgagors, and the decision of the Survey Officer was given practically ex parte. (the first respondent herein). The recitals in the lease deed, Exhibit 2(a) which was executed by the defendants of the second party, were inconsistent with their claim that the lands were raiyati.<br><br>30 (2) Of the Ajmer-Merwara Municipalities Regulation, 1925, the electoral roll for the Parliamentary constituency was only treated as the basis for the electoral roll of the Municipality and that the rules in so far as they made no provision for the revision of the electoral roll, for the adjudication of claims to be included therein or for entertaining objections to such inclusion, were defective and, therefore, the electoral roll of the Ajmer Municipality which was authenticated and published by the appellant on August 8, 1955, was not in conformity with the provisions of S.<br><br>Why then did they not produce Exhibits 2 and 3 at the hearing? do execute in favour of the plaintiffs proper deed or deeds of transfer of . When the cover note incorporates the policy in this manner, it does not have to recite the term and conditions, but merely to refer to a particular standard policy. Where a compromise decree provides both for a personal remedy and a charge, the question whether the decree-holder can pursue the personal remedy while reserving the remedy under the charge depends on the intention to be gathered from Advocates [[http://nriillegalservices.com click here to investigate]] the terms of the decree.<br><br>five annas share in the Marwari Brothers. 30 (2) and the relevant,provisions of the Regulation 69 and could not form the basis of any valid elections to be held to the Ajmer Municipal Committee. 22/3 and 23 measuring 8. The license period was for an initial period of 30 years, with the option of a further renewal for a maximum period of 60 years. 1960, executed in respect of the property covered in the acquisition notifications between Krishi Gopalan Silpa Sikshalaya and M/S Andaman Timber Industries Ltd.<br><br>It directs that "against payment or tender by the plaintiffs. Vacuum and Air are being delayed. The learned Attorney General also placed reliance upon the license deed dated 02. The notice specified that commercial use of land within the said zone was prohibited. If the proposal is for a standard policy and the cover note refers to it, the assured is taken to have accepted the terms of that policy. It was to the interests of the mortgagees that the'lands should be held to be 'sir', and it was further their duty to defend the title of the mortgagors as against the claim made by the tenants that they were raiyati lands.<br><br> I also noticed that at the point of the final outlets at the end of the Branch pipeline at the Bed heads wherever they are specified by the Work Order, the double lockout with parking facility has been installed but the electrical switches for which space is left in the panel has not yet been fixed. The mortgagees were parties to the proceedings, and they did not appear and produce the mortgage deeds, Exhibits 2 and 3, under which they got into possession, and which described the lands as 'sir'.<br><br> 10, Nagar Manmad Road, in violation of the construction line and control line. Further, the said license could be terminated at the will of the Review Petitioners- Appellants. The incorporation of the terms and conditions of the policy may also arise from a combination of references in two or more documents passing between the parties. 1990 executed in Form AG-3 under Sections 146 (ii) and 164 of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Land Revenue and Land Reforms Regulation, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulation, 1966), by way of which licensing rights were granted to Respondent No.<br><br> Why did they not produce it at the hearing ? 1, and no absolute interest in the land is created by virtue of the said license. 1 in respect of Survey Nos.
+
It is further pleaded that Ayyappan Chettiar executed Will dated 13. The duties and functions of the Council as catalogued in Section 49 of the Act in addition to the municipal governance of a municipal area with its limits also make it incumbent for it to undertake and to make reasonable provisions, amongst others for removing obstructions and projections in public streets or places and in spaces, not being private property, which are open to the enjoyment of the public, whether such spaces are vested in the Council or in Government.<br><br>Succinctly stated, facts of this case are that the appellant/plaintiff instituted Original Suit No. Sastri, being the competent Authority Under Section-5 of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (13 of 1976), have, on the basis of relevant information and relevant material available to me, reason to believe that the properties described in the schedule enclosed hereto which are held by you or on your behalf, are illegally acquired properties within the meaning of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section-3 of the said Act.<br><br>(f) Being aggrieved, the appellant herein filed Criminal Appeal No. 1) This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 14. The first appeal is a valuable right and the parties have a right to be heard both on questions of law and on facts and the judgment in the first appeal must address itself to all the issues of law and fact and decide it by giving reasons in support of the findings. Section 8 recognizes it to be a body corporate with perpetual succession and a common seal, possessing the power to acquire, hold and dispose of property, and to enter into contracts and may by the said name sue, or be sued through its Chief Officer.<br><br>Alleging that the defendant has no right over the disputed property, relief of permanent injunction against him is sought in the suit. 1999 to the extent of acquittal of Dharamveer and Paramveer. Sitting as a court of first appeal, it was the duty of the High Court to deal with all the issues and the evidence led by the parties before recording its findings. The conviction by the High Court was based not only on the statements made by Maha Singh (deceased) but also on the un-shattered testimony of the eye- witness Dariya Singh (PW-1) and the statement of the independent witness Rajinder Singh (PW-11).<br><br>1990 in favour of the plaintiff, and after death of his father in 1997, the plaintiff is in exclusive possession of the property. Plaintiffs father Ayyappan Chettiar purchased the property from Gurusamy Naicker, and constructed his house. It is in these circumstances that the appellant has now, inter alia, contended that the order passed by the High Court is without appointing any guardian on her behalf and contrary to the provisions of Order XXXII Rules 3, 10 and 11 of the CPC.<br><br>1963 Gopalsamy Pillai transferred the property by executing a sale deed in favour of one Lakshmiammal. The Council is one of the municipal authorities as contemplated under Section 7 of the Act 1965 charged with the responsibility of carrying out the provisions there of for each municipal area. Kanwar Singh-the complainant Advocates ([http://acquitlaw.com/bail/ look at this]) also filed Criminal  Advocates ([http://lawyerchandigarh.com/procedure-to-file-a-complaint-in-rape-case/ no title]) Revision No. The plea that the Council is not the owner of the land thus is of no relevance or significance.<br><br>488- DB of 1999 before the High Court. 92 of 2003 before District Munsif, Virudhunagar, for permanent  Advocates; [http://nrilegalservices.me/about/ no title], injunction restraining the defendant from interfering in his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in suit. Plaintiff Andisamy Chettiar and defendant Subburaj Chettiar are sons of Ayyappan Chettiar. The Code of Conduct for Stock Brokers, inter alia, lays down that the stock-broker shall maintain high standards of integrity, promptitude and  Advocates ([http://lawyerchandigarh.com/special-requirements-where-maintenance-is-claimed-by-wife/ no title]) fairness in the conduct of all investment business and  Advocates ([http://slachd.com/what-documents-are-required-in-a-divorce-case/ no title]) shall act with due skill, care and diligence in the conduct of all investment business.<br><br>2010 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 208 of 2000 before the High Court for setting aside the judgment and order dated 22/27. Insofar as the merits of the appeal are concerned, the High Court took the view that on the facts before it, details of which will be noticed in due course, there was a joint family in existence in which the second wife Rama Vidyarthi had played a predominant role and that the suit property was purchased out of the joint family funds namely the insurance money and the advance received from the Pratap Press Trust, Kanpur.<br><br>Lakshmiammal further transferred the property to Gurusamy Naicker through deed dated 26. The code also enumerates different shades of the duties of a stock-broker towards the investor, details of which are not being extracted herein except to say that all such duties pertain to the high standards of integrity that the stock-broker is required to maintain in the conduct of his business. It is pleaded in the plaint that originally the property in dispute was owned by one Gopalsamy Pillai.<br><br>488-DB of 1999 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal.

Latest revision as of 05:52, 29 October 2018

It is further pleaded that Ayyappan Chettiar executed Will dated 13. The duties and functions of the Council as catalogued in Section 49 of the Act in addition to the municipal governance of a municipal area with its limits also make it incumbent for it to undertake and to make reasonable provisions, amongst others for removing obstructions and projections in public streets or places and in spaces, not being private property, which are open to the enjoyment of the public, whether such spaces are vested in the Council or in Government.

Succinctly stated, facts of this case are that the appellant/plaintiff instituted Original Suit No. Sastri, being the competent Authority Under Section-5 of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (13 of 1976), have, on the basis of relevant information and relevant material available to me, reason to believe that the properties described in the schedule enclosed hereto which are held by you or on your behalf, are illegally acquired properties within the meaning of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section-3 of the said Act.

(f) Being aggrieved, the appellant herein filed Criminal Appeal No. 1) This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 14. The first appeal is a valuable right and the parties have a right to be heard both on questions of law and on facts and the judgment in the first appeal must address itself to all the issues of law and fact and decide it by giving reasons in support of the findings. Section 8 recognizes it to be a body corporate with perpetual succession and a common seal, possessing the power to acquire, hold and dispose of property, and to enter into contracts and may by the said name sue, or be sued through its Chief Officer.

Alleging that the defendant has no right over the disputed property, relief of permanent injunction against him is sought in the suit. 1999 to the extent of acquittal of Dharamveer and Paramveer. Sitting as a court of first appeal, it was the duty of the High Court to deal with all the issues and the evidence led by the parties before recording its findings. The conviction by the High Court was based not only on the statements made by Maha Singh (deceased) but also on the un-shattered testimony of the eye- witness Dariya Singh (PW-1) and the statement of the independent witness Rajinder Singh (PW-11).

1990 in favour of the plaintiff, and after death of his father in 1997, the plaintiff is in exclusive possession of the property. Plaintiffs father Ayyappan Chettiar purchased the property from Gurusamy Naicker, and constructed his house. It is in these circumstances that the appellant has now, inter alia, contended that the order passed by the High Court is without appointing any guardian on her behalf and contrary to the provisions of Order XXXII Rules 3, 10 and 11 of the CPC.

1963 Gopalsamy Pillai transferred the property by executing a sale deed in favour of one Lakshmiammal. The Council is one of the municipal authorities as contemplated under Section 7 of the Act 1965 charged with the responsibility of carrying out the provisions there of for each municipal area. Kanwar Singh-the complainant Advocates (look at this) also filed Criminal Advocates (no title) Revision No. The plea that the Council is not the owner of the land thus is of no relevance or significance.

488- DB of 1999 before the High Court. 92 of 2003 before District Munsif, Virudhunagar, for permanent Advocates; no title, injunction restraining the defendant from interfering in his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in suit. Plaintiff Andisamy Chettiar and defendant Subburaj Chettiar are sons of Ayyappan Chettiar. The Code of Conduct for Stock Brokers, inter alia, lays down that the stock-broker shall maintain high standards of integrity, promptitude and Advocates (no title) fairness in the conduct of all investment business and Advocates (no title) shall act with due skill, care and diligence in the conduct of all investment business.

2010 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 208 of 2000 before the High Court for setting aside the judgment and order dated 22/27. Insofar as the merits of the appeal are concerned, the High Court took the view that on the facts before it, details of which will be noticed in due course, there was a joint family in existence in which the second wife Rama Vidyarthi had played a predominant role and that the suit property was purchased out of the joint family funds namely the insurance money and the advance received from the Pratap Press Trust, Kanpur.

Lakshmiammal further transferred the property to Gurusamy Naicker through deed dated 26. The code also enumerates different shades of the duties of a stock-broker towards the investor, details of which are not being extracted herein except to say that all such duties pertain to the high standards of integrity that the stock-broker is required to maintain in the conduct of his business. It is pleaded in the plaint that originally the property in dispute was owned by one Gopalsamy Pillai.

488-DB of 1999 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal.

Retrieved from "http://kb.digimat.in/index.php?title=The_Definitive_Guide_To_Lawyer_In_Chandigarh&oldid=187290"