32. Merely because the plaintiff came forward with a case different from the one mentioned in the promissory note it would not be correct to say that the presumption under Section 118 did not apply at all. Such a presumption applies once the execution of the promissory note is accepted by the defendant. vol-2

32. Merely because the plaintiff came forward with a case different from the one mentioned in the promissory note it would not be correct to say that the presumption under Section 118 did not apply at all. Such a presumption applies once the execution of the promissory note is accepted by the defendant.

1.whether A Deputy General Manager is not a person who is responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company as he does not fall under any of the categories (a) to (g) listed in section 5 of the Companies Act the Deputy General Manager, could be prosecuted either under sub-section (1) or under sub-section (2) of Section 141 of the Act ? – No

1.whether A Deputy General Manager is not a person who is responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company as he does not fall under any of the categories (a) to (g) listed in section 5 of the Companies Act the Deputy General Manager, could be prosecuted either under sub-section… Read More 1.whether A Deputy General Manager is not a person who is responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company as he does not fall under any of the categories (a) to (g) listed in section 5 of the Companies Act the Deputy General Manager, could be prosecuted either under sub-section (1) or under sub-section (2) of Section 141 of the Act ? – No

Bihar Money Lenders Act (3 of 1938), s. 5 and Bihar Money Lenders (Regulation of Transactions) Act (VII of 1939), s. 4-Moneylender lending money in excess of amount in registration certificate-Suit for recovery-Maintainability. – MAINTAINABLE

Bihar Money Lenders Act (3 of 1938), s. 5 and Bihar Money Lenders (Regulation of Transactions) Act (VII of 1939), s. 4-Moneylender lending money in excess of amount in registration certificate-Suit for recovery-Maintainability. – MAINTAINABLE

vol-2

Mere proof of  Exhibit P.1disputed cheque was one of cheque leaf in Exhibit D.2, and all the leaves in Exhibit D.2 [check book  ] was seen used in the year 1987 itself did not empower the accused to ask for acquittal, in the absence of definite stand in the cross examination of the complainant –… Read More vol-2

vol-2

whether the period of limitation for making deposit, in an application to set aside sale of immovable property under Order XXI Rule 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is 30 days from the date of sale (being the period prescribed in Order XXI Rule 92(2) C.P.C.) or 60 days from the date of sale… Read More vol-2

money suit – production of incometax records of assessee – prohibited – vol-2

Production of document-Assessment proceedings-Law prohibiting income-tax authorities from disclosure Production of proceedings into court–Waiver by assessee–Indian Income-tax Act, 6122 (11 of 1922). s. 54. – the prohibition imposed in s. 54 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, is absolute and the operation of the section is not obliterated by any waiver by the assessee in… Read More money suit – production of incometax records of assessee – prohibited – vol-2