LawMirror.com

Results of section+14+limitation+ +not+good+faith+limitation+ +section+14+good+faith

Andriod Application iphone Application

Showing : 311-320 of 6076 Results

HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANCHKULA

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 24A -- Limitation - Cause of action to the complainant accrued in the years 1992,1993 and lastly in the year 2000 i.e. the up to the date the premium was being received by the OPs - Complaint filed on 15.3.2005 filed beyond the limitation period of two years as prescribed in Section 24A of the Act - The subsequent correspondence, if..........

RAJASTHAN CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JAIPUR

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g), 14{1)(d) -- Post Office Act, Section 6 - Registered letter - Containing Bank draft not reaching destination - Deficiency in service - Compensation - Relying upon Section 6 of the Post Office Act plea by appellant-OP that its liability could not be more than Rs.100/- repelled - Appellant has not come out with his version as to..........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g), 14(1)(d), Government Saving Banks Act, 1873, Section 15 -- Post Office Time Deposit Account - In terms of Notification issued by the Central Government no Time Deposit to be made or accepted on behalf of any institution w.e.f. 1.4.1995 - Deposit made by appellant and the same accepted by Post Master because of the lack of..........

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g), 14(1)(d), Government Saving Banks Act, 1873, Section 15 -- Post Office Time Deposit Account - In terms of Notification issued by the Central Government no Time Deposit to be made or accepted on behalf of any institution w.e.f. 1.4.1995 - Deposit made by appellant and the same accepted by Post Master because of the lack of..........

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 100, Order 42, Rule 2 -- Second appeal - Substantial question of law - Power of Court - Held, Court can hear, for reasons to be recorded, appeal on any other substantial question of law, not formulated by it, if it is satisfied that case involves such question - R.2 of O.42 Code further provides that it shall not be open to appellant to..........

PATNA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, Section 21(5) - - Jurisdiction - NHRC declined to entertain the complaint, and had passed a general order to forward it to the appropriate authority - He did not even name the authority to whom it had to be forwarded - On account of some inexplicable reason, perhaps fortuitous circumstance and ministerial act, got forwarded to..........

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Section 2(oo), 25F, 33 -- Termination - No permission was obtained and admittedly the order of retrenchment relied upon by the Management had been passed when there was reference before the Labour Court for adjudication - The reference had been made in this case and instituted before the Labour Court on 18.7.1989 and the alleged retrenchment..........

JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Evidence Act, 1872, Section 74, 76, 77 -- Judgment of court - Public document - Proof of contents thereof - Held, judgment of court is a public document in terms of Section 74 of the Act - In terms of Section 77 of the Act, certified copy thereof can be produced in proof of contents of public document - Where law provides for production of copy of judgment/order of court,..........

NATIONAL DELHI CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g), 14(1)(d), Insurance Act, 1938, Section 64UM -- Insurance policy - Stock broking business - Business peril - Insurance claim - Repudiation - Loss caused by business peril - Burden of proof - To be eligible under Section 1(c) of the insurance policy for indemnification of a loss claimed to have been suffered the assured would..........

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI

Year of decision: 2011
Details

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g), 14(1)(d), Insurance Act, 1938, Section 64UM -- Insurance policy - Stock broking business - Business peril - Insurance claim - Repudiation - Loss caused by business peril - Burden of proof - To be eligible under Section 1(c) of the insurance policy for indemnification of a loss claimed to have been suffered the assured would..........

Showing : 311-320 of 6076 Results