Showing : 101-110 of 122 Results

PUNJAB AND HARAYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2001
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 141-- Dishonour of cheque - Offence by company - Quashing of complaint - Plea that no notice was given to the petitioner as required under Section 138 proviso (b) and Special Power of Attorney was not authorized by the proprietor of the firm to institute complaint against him as he was sleeping Director..........
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2001
Details
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 33, Rule 1-- Permission to sue as an indigent person - Where applicant is sole proprietor of firm and carries on business of his firm by availing credit facilities from bank, all assets of his firm on which lending bank does not hold lien, must be disclosed - Disclosure of only a few personal effects of..........
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2000
Details
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 21(1)-- Proviso - Suit filed against respondent No.1 under bona fide belief that he is proprietor and owner of the shop - On becoming aware about name of real owner and proprietor who was none but brother of Respondent No.1 applied for impleading respondents Nos.2 & 3 - Held, plaintiff is entitled to..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Punjab Tenancy Act, Section 77(3)(n)-- Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, Section 14 - A(ii) - Tenant's liability to pay rent - Right of tenant on Tenants Permissible Area and vesting of land in State Government - Only if allotment to tenant has been made - Land would vest in the State only if land is declared surplus - Tenant would..........
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 141-- Sole proprietorship concern - Complaint filed against firm instead of proprietor - Sole proprietorship concern is not a judicial person to come under Criminal Prosecution - Receipt of notice by any other person may not be acceptable and valid acknowledgment of notice - Complaint is liable to be..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 1999
Details
Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952, Section 8A-- Chandigarh Lease - Hold of Sites and Building Rules 12 and 20 - Resumption of Booth for violating terms and conditions of allotment (non - payment of instalments and assigning/sub - letting) - Possession of allottees or any one claiming through them becomes unauthorised - Proceedings held under..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1996
Details
East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules, 1949-- Bachat land, redistribution of amongst proprietors of the village hasab rasad raqba khewat-Land taken from each proprietor by imposing a pro-rata cut on his holding with a view to meet common purpose of the village-Land left over after providing common purpose-Known as Bachat land-Does not vest in..........
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1996
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138-- Cheque issued by a Proprietary concern in favour of Proprietary concern - Complaint filed in personal name (of the complainant and accused) without impleading the trading concern - Held, in case of Proprietary concern the Proprietor is always an affected person who can either indict or be indicted..........
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1991
Details
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138, 141-- Cheque dishonoured - Proprietary concern - Complaint against - Not maintainable - Complaint is maintainable against the proprietor only...........
DELHI HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 1991
Details
Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Section 106-- Notice properly addressed sent as per registered post - Notice was also addressed to proprietor at his residential address - If somebody received the registered A.D. notice on behalf of the defendant it cannot be said that the defendant has not been properly served...........

Showing : 101-110 of 122 Results