https://freelegalconsultancy.blogspot.com/2020/09/notification-under-section-8a-of.html The High Court held that since the importers, who had imported goods from 7 PART A Pakistan, had presented their bills of entry and completed the process of “selfassessment” before the notification enhancing the rate of duty to 200 per cent was issued and uploaded, the enhanced rate of duty was not attracted. The… Read More Notification under Section 8A of the Customs Tariff Act 1975 – introduced a tariff entry by which all goods originating in or exported from the Islamic Republic of Pakistan were subjected to an enhanced customs duty of 200%. – Whether is prospective or retrospective and tax is reassessable ?
https://freelegalconsultancy.blogspot.com/2020/09/whether-respondent-no1-being-founder.html NLSIU, a premier Law University of the country, was established pursuant to a joint initiative of the Supreme Court of India, the Bar Council of India and the Karnataka Bar Council. Bar Council of India, set up a society, namely, National Law School of India Society as a registered society under the Karnataka Societies… Read More Whether the respondent No.1 being founder member of Consortium of National Law Universities, a registered society, is bound by its Bye-Laws and was obliged to admit the students for integrated B.A.LL.B. (Hons.) Programme through CLAT 2020?
it is the right of the parties to get the matter disposed of expeditiously particularly in Family Court matters, the trial Court is directed to make an endeavour to dispose of the matter expeditiously. Both parities are directed to cooperate for speedy disposal of the matter. https://freelegalconsultancy.blogspot.com/2020/09/right-of-parties-to-get-matter-disposed.html the… Read More right of the parties to get the matter disposed of expeditiously
https://freelegalconsultancy.blogspot.com/2020/09/order-i-rule-102-and-section-151-of-cpc.html “It is relevant to note here that the present suit in O.S.No.131/2015 is filed by the plaintiffs not basing on any oral lease, but basing on the registered lease deed, dated 05.03.2012 executed by the plaintiffs herein and the defendant herein with respect to the plaint schedule property. The said registered lease agreement, dated… Read More Order I Rule 10(2) and Section 151 of CPC. – impleading petition by third parties – since there is registered lease agreement between the plaintiffs/landlords herein and the defendant/tenant herein with respect to the plaint schedule property herein, the submission of the petitioner Nos.1 to 3/third parties that they have taken the plaint schedule property herein for monthly lease from the plaintiffs/landlords is also found untenable – as the petitioner Nos.1 to 3/third parties are neither necessary nor proper parties to be impleaded in the present suit.- Court dismissed their petition.
https://freelegalconsultancy.blogspot.com/2020/09/document-petition-reopen-petition.html ‘whether the petitions filed by the respondents could have been ordered by the learned trial Judge and permitting recall of DW.1 for the purpose ofmarking the documents sought to be produced through him, is proper?’t he trial Court could not have come to the conclusion observing that the General Power of Attorney of the… Read More DOCUMENT PETITION, REOPEN PETITION, RECALL PETITION – when DW.2 clearly referred to the fact that both the attestors to Ex.B1 are no more, in his deposition, it is unnecessary either to reopen the suit, to receive the documents sought to be produced by the 1 st respondent or to recall DW.1 for the purpose of marking them.
Or.39 rule 1&2 CPC-Whether the petitioner has made out prima facie case and balance of convenience in his favour and against the respondents? https://freelegalconsultancy.blogspot.com/2020/09/or39-rule-1-cpc-whether-petitioner-has.html The material in the nature of revenue records produced by the petitioner did make out his case as to possession and enjoyment and as a matter of right, on a prima… Read More Or.39 rule 1&2 CPC-Whether the petitioner has made out prima facie case and balance of convenience in his favour and against the respondents?
https://freelegalconsultancy.blogspot.com/2020/09/order-xxxviii-rule-5-cpc-it-is.html A party to the suit, namely, the plaintiff cannot as a matter of right insist that there shall be invariably an order to attach the property or the movables, which the party claims being the security or the subject matter of the petition. Even otherwise, it is a relief which has to be granted… Read More Order XXXVIII Rule 5 C.P.C, it is obligatory for the Court to issue a notice before directing attachment. – it is a relief which has to be granted in exceptional cases and in specified circumstances contemplated by Order XXXVIII Rule 5(1) C.P.C.
https://freelegalconsultancy.blogspot.com/2020/09/order-xxxix-rule-3-of-cpc-which-reads.html Where an injunction has been granted without giving notice to the opposite party, the Court shall make an endeavour to finally dispose of the application within thirty days from the date on which the injunction was granted; and where it is unable so to do, it shall record its reasons for such inability.” The… Read More Order XXXIX Rule 3-A of CPC, which reads as under: “3-A. Court to dispose of application for injunction within thirty days – Else be considered as refusal to excercise jurisdiction
service of notice on the respondent – Rule 2 (b) Order XXIX of Code of Civil Procedure 1908, service by leaving it or sending it by post addressed to the corporation at the registered office, or if there is no registered office then at the place where the corporation carries on business is self sufficient… Read More service of notice on the respondent – Rule 2 (b) Order XXIX of Code of Civil Procedure 1908, service by leaving it or sending it by post addressed to the corporation at the registered office, or if there is no registered office then at the place where the corporation carries on business is self sufficient service, is permitted by law.