SimranLaw 5 Essential Elements For Chandigarh Advocate

Please log in or register to like posts.

Rule 5B of Order 27 casts a duty on the Court in a suit Advocates in Chandigarh filed against the Government to assist the parties to the suit in arriving at a settlement. Accordingly, a fresh proclamation was issued, for the auction of the properties of Deve Sugars Ltd. The bidder deposited the bid amount, within the stipulated Lawyer Chandigarh period. Rule 5B of Order 27 reads as under: 21) Order 27 of the Code deals with the suits which are filed by the Government or against the Government. No challenge was raised against the auction conducted on 11.

2003, who forwarded the matter to the Registrar General vide order dated 18. The said letter was received by the High Court along with a forwarding letter of the District Judge dated 7. As will appear from the judgment pronounced by this Court on the 15th May, 1952, on that application, it was not seriously disputed that the effect of the amendments referred to above was that the power to control and regulate trade originally delegated to the Provincial Government by Notification No.

The highest bid was made by Anita International, the appellant before this Court. said that there was no substantial difference in the procedure prescribed under section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act and the impugned Act and that in any case the procedure prescribed by Advocates Chandigarh the Act was a good substitute for that prescribed by the Indian Income-tax Act. The bid of Anita International of Rs. n(k) ‘sign’ in relation to a person who is unable to write his name means authenticate in such manner as may be prescribed.

created a bona fide belief in the applicant’s mind that they were prejudiced against him and had made up their minds and indicated that he shall have to go in appeal to the Supreme Court. Whether this attaches exaggerated importance to the authorisation is not for us to decide. 2003 and the letters were placed before the Administrative Judge on 7. ” We are consequently of opinion that the ” signing,” whenever a ” signature ” is necessary, must be in strict accordance with the requirements of the Act and that where the signature cannot be written it must be authorised in the manner prescribed by the Rules.

2004, the Honble Chief Justice of the High Court referred the matter to the Court concerned dealing with contempt cases and notice was also issued to the appellant. ” It is evident then that wherever the, element of signing ” has to be incorporated into any provision of the Act it must be construed in the sense set out above. 2004 for placing the same before the Honble Chief Justice of the High Court and on 11.

The High Court observed: The rival parties were also permitted to bring their buyers, if there was anyone interested. 2005 as the date for holding the auction. The reserve price was fixed at Rs. Therefore, whether ” subscribe ” is a synonym for ” sign ” or whether it means ” sign ” plus something else, namely a particular assent, the element of ” signing ” has to be present: the schedule places that beyond doubt because it requires certain ” signature*.

603(1)-I, dated the 21st October, 1946, was modified so as to exclude from the scope of such delegation pulses other-than gram”. ed that persons coming under sub-section (4) of section 5 also belonged to the same class and therefore on the same grounds that section also could not be declared void. The auction was actually conducted on 11. This was a class by itself and needed special treatment and there fore the law did not offend against the equal protection of the laws clause of the Constitution.

25 crores was accepted. It is also pertinent to mention, that the auction scheduled by the Recovery Officer for 1. Ultimately, after hearing the parties concerned, the High Court did not accept the defence of the appellant and after considering the facts of the case, it delivered the impugned judgment whereby punishment has been imposed upon the appellant. On the 10th June, 1953, a letter (Exhibit B to the petition) was addressed by the Deputy Commissioner, Food, Uttar Pradesh, to all Regional Food Controllers and Deputy Food Controllers and all District Magistrates in Uttar Pradesh instructing them to regard all futures in foodgrains mentioned Lawyers in Chandigarh the Schedule to the 1945 Order including pulses other than gram as punishable.

2004, could not be conducted. That application succeeded and the offending Notification to the extent it dealt with arhar, peas, urd and moong was declared invalid and the State of Uttar Pradesh was directed to abstain from giving effect to it. ” We are concerned in this appeal only with article 102(1)(e). (d) if he is not a citizen of India, or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State, or is under any acknowledgment of allegiance or adherence to a foreign State; – (e) if he is so disqualified by or under any law made by Parliament.

We are therefore bound to give full affect to this policy What is beyond 487 dispute is that this is regarded as a matter of special moment and that special provision has been made to meet -such cases. 1 “The observations and references to the Supreme Court by Rao and Deo JJ. 2005, within the postulated period of 30 days, as is permissible Advocates in Chandigarh terms of the Rules framed under the RDB Act.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *