Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: powers of attorney act 1882 amending act i powers of attorney amendment act 1982 Year: 2017 Page 1 of about 3 results (0.107 seconds)

Jul 13 2017 (HC)

Ram Gopal Vs. Pravin Kumar Mehta

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Jul-13-2017

..... an agreement was executed on 27.05.1990 between the petitioner and one sushila kumari mehta (since deceased) through her son and holder of power of attorney sudhir kumar mehta (respondent no.2) for sale of her land, but she failed to execute the same. thereafter the petitioner filed ..... of execution of power of attorney by sudhir kumar mehta much earlier and therefore there had been no diligence on the part of the petitioner to carry out the amendment in the plaint at the right stage. it was also observed inter alia by the learned sub judge-i, ranchi that in ..... 27. order vi rule 17 of the code deals with amendment of pleadings. by amendment act 46 of 1999, this provision was deleted. it has again been restored by amendment act 22 of 2002 but with an added proviso to prevent application for amendment being allowed after the trial has commenced, unless court comes ..... salem advocate bar association, tamil nadu versus union of india (supra), it can be construed that the object of order vi rule 17 after amendment act 22/2002 is to prevent frivolous applications which are filed to delay the trial. however, in the facts of the present case, it ..... to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial. the proviso, to some extent, curtails absolute discretion to allow amendment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 2017 (SC)

Macquarie Bank Limited Vs. Shilpi Cable Technologies Ltd

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-15-2017

..... or compromise would often cause undue delay, loss and inconvenience, especially in the case of non-resident persons. it has always been universally understood that a party can always act by his duly authorised representative. if a power-of-attorney holder can enter into an agreement or compromise on behalf of his principal, so can counsel, possessed of the requisite authorisation by vakalatnama ..... , we are of the view that the words in writing and signed by the parties , inserted by the c.p.c. (amendment) act, 1976, must necessarily mean, to borrow the language of order iii rule 1 cpc: any appearance, application or act in or to any court, required or authorized by law to be made or done by a party in such court, may ..... the general rules and it cannot be interpreted as to supersede the special rules. the amendment also must be read as being subject to rules 1(3)(a), 3(1) and 4(2) of the general rules themselves. the amendment cannot be read as abrogating all other special rules in respect of all departments. in a given case where there are no special rules ..... the basis of a judgment of this court in byram pestonji gariwala v. union bank of india, (1992) 1 scc31at 47-48. in this judgment, what fell for consideration was order xxiii rule 3 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 after its amendment in 1976. it was argued in that case that a compromise in a suit had, under order xxiii .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 2017 (SC)

Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs. Classic Credit Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-21-2017

..... was bound to be treated as retrospective, especially because there was no express or implied intent in the legislative enactments ( the 2002 amendment act ; and the 2014 amendment act ) that the amendments were intended to have prospective effect.11. additionally, it was submitted, that in the facts and circumstances of this case, there would ..... or obligations or impose new duties in respect of transactions which were complete at the time the amending act came into force (see a debtor, in re, ex p debtor (1936) 1 ch 237 (ca) and attorney general v. vernazza 1960 ac965. the same principle is embodied in section 6 of the general ..... that justice is done in accordance with the recognized rules of criminal jurisprudence, and that subordinate criminal courts do not exceed their jurisdiction, or abuse their powers vested in them by the code. .. . the aforesaid determination also emerges from the following observations recorded in paragraph 6 of the above judgment, which ..... of the decision of the bombay high court, referred to above, when it enacted section 431 for the first time in the code of 1882. if the legislature intended that an application in revision pending in a high court, should be dealt with on the same footing as a pending ..... of the decision of the bombay high court, referred to above, when it enacted s. 431 for the first time in the code of 1882. if the legislature intended that an application in revision pending in a high court, should be dealt with on the same footing as a pending .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 04 2017 (HC)

K.S. Javarappa Vs. B. Ramaiah Since Deceased by LRs., and Others

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Apr-04-2017

..... 1958 and 08.01.1965 and originals of sale deed dated 24.06.1964 (wrongly mentioned as 26.06.1964 in i.a.no.1/2005), agreement dated 30.08.1985, general power of attorney dated 03.02.1986 and affidavit dated 03.02.1986. 8. the learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the ..... the said submission, the basic requirement to be met by the appellant defendant is that he has to prove the agreement of sale and general power of attorney executed by gopinath pai. though he has deposed in his cross-examination that gopinath pai would be summoned and he would be examined, no steps ..... a consenting witness. the defendant has purchased the site from gopinath pai and in that regard, he has executed an agreement of sale, general power of attorney and has sworn to an affidavit for having received the consideration amount on 03.02.1986. since the defendant is the absolute owner in possession ..... suit filed by the plaintiffs. the suit was filed by the original plaintiff for the relief of permanent injunction. subsequently, he filed an application for amendment of plaint in order to include the relief of declaration and the same was allowed. during pendency of the suit, the original plaintiff died and his ..... not, after the exercise of due diligence, be produced by him at the time when the decree appealed against was passed [clause (aa), inserted by act 104 of 1976], or (iii) the appellate court requires any document to be produced or any witness to be examined to enable it to pronounce judgment, .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 2017 (HC)

A.C. Nagaveni and Others Vs. Akkamma and Others

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : May-03-2017

..... of the principal. 13. order iii, rules 1 and 2 cpc empowers the holder of power of attorney to "act" on behalf of the principal. in our view the word "acts" employed in order iii, rules 1 and 2 cpc, confines only in respect of "acts" done by the power of attorney holder in exercise of power granted by the instrument. the term "acts" would not include deposing in place and ..... /2008 for stay of judgment and decree passed in o.s.no.6906/1997 does not survive for consideration and it stands dismissed. (v) i.a.no.4/2013 in rfa no.770/2008 filed by respondents-7 and 11 for amendment of the plaint does not survive for consideration in view of the fact that suit itself has been dismissed. hence ..... properties and as such they are entitled to equal shares in accordance with amended act 39 of 2005 as provided under section 6 of the hindu succession act and as such reallotment of shares to be made accordingly. it is the further contention of sri.reddeppa that insofar as issue no.1 is concerned the burden was rightly cast by trial court on the ..... , i.a.no.4/2013 is hereby dismissed. (vi) all other pending applications stands consigned to records. (vii) no order as to costs. (viii) registry is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 2017 (HC)

Ms Aahaa Planners and Developers Pvt Ltd Through Its Managing Director ...

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Jul-21-2017

..... nominated by the petitioner and mr. g.m. mishra, both are required to submit the declaration under section 12 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 as amended by amendment act 3 of 2016. let both the learned arbitrators file a declaration within a period of one week. post the matter on 14th july, ..... necessary documents relating to the land, such as original document of ownership, up to date rent receipt, up todate municipal receipt, family partition paper, power of attorney, etc, finally, the petitioner had to serve a notice on 1st december 2016 invoking arbitration clause 29 for reference of the dispute before an arbitrator ..... 2017. in terms of section 12 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 as amended by the amendment act 3 of 2016, both the arbitrators were required to file their declarations. the declarations have been filed by mr. g. m. mishra ..... the arbitrator. therefore, the dispute is alive and it is well within the period of limitation in terms of article 54 of the limitation act, 1963. i have considered the submissions of the counsel for the parties and have gone through the relevant materials on record and the agreement in question. ..... the high court of jharkhand at ranchi arbitration application no. 7 of 2017 m/s. aahaa planners and developers private limited ..... petitioner vs. 1. hasan rizvi saba 2. hasan razi arsi 3. ali raza zaidi 4. kaifi azmi 5. aariz raza 6. kasif raza ......respondents coram .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 04 2017 (HC)

Jaldhi Overseas Pte Ltd. Vs. Bhushan Power and Steel Limited

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-04-2017

..... malafide. per contra, mr.pratap chatterjee, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the award debtor submits that for raising a presumption under section 85 of the evidence act, the power of attorney must be executed before and authenticated by a notary public or any court, judge, magistrate, indian consul or vice-consul or representative of the central government. this presumption will ..... that every document purporting to be a power-of-attorney, and to have been executed before, and authenticated by, a notary public, or any court, judge, magistrate, 1[indian].consul or vice-consul, or representative 2[***].of the 3[central government]., was so executed and authenticated. section 3 in the oaths act, 1969 3. power to administer oaths. (1) the following courts and persons shall have ..... manual is intended for the guidance of all notaries public. the said manual gives background and history of notaries public in singapore. it appears that in 1995, the notaries public act was significantly amended in that the power of appointing a notary public became vested in the senate of the singapore academy of law. by virtue of section 3 ..... (1) of the notaries public act the senate are only empowered to appoint fit and proper persons to be notaries public for a period not exceeding 12 months. under section 3(2) of the notaries public act, no .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 25 2017 (HC)

V. Anil Reddy, Represented by the Power of Attorney Holder B. Bavadeep ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : May-25-2017

..... ., the 1st defendant has not filed the written statement and neither denied the oral partition of the year 1971 nor partition deed dated 1.5.1982. since the coparcener has died prior to commencement of the amendment act, succession opens out on the date of death as per the prevailing provisions of the succession and the rights of the legal heirs get crystallized even ..... deed which are not included in the present suit. therefore the suit filed by the plaintiff for partition is not maintainable. he further contended that defendant nos.1 and 2 have executed general power of attorney in favour of k. narayana reddy, father of defendant nos.6 to 9 and the said narayana reddy alienated the properties. the said alienation is not questioned ..... the case on merits of the suit. therefore the 1st point raised in the present appeals has to be answered in the negative holding that this court while exercising the powers under the provisions of order 43 rule 1 (r) of cpc cannot decide the case on merits of the pending suit between the parties while considering the orders passed on ..... in the present suit. he further submits that, on 04.08.1951, item no.1 of the suit properties was purchased by narayana reddy on behalf of three brothers .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 08 2017 (HC)

Ms Aahaa Planners and Developers Pvt Ltd Through Its Managing Director ...

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Dec-08-2017

..... as the second arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. a declaration in terms of section 12(5) of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 as amended by the act of 3 of 2016 is therefore required to be submitted by the proposed arbitrator. -4- let the declaration be submitted by the proposed ..... of 2017 3. pursuant to the order dated 24.11.2017, declaration in terms of section 12(5) of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 as amended by the act no.3 of 2016 has been furnished by the proposed arbitrator mr. gunendra mohan misra, which is at flag-y. similar declaration has ..... 2008 in page 3 and page 4, para 2 or annexure-1(main application) page 15 and page 16, para 2 in sub section (k, kh, g, gh, ng, ch). petitioner has received all the required original documents along with power of attorney document and made signature on the said agreement dated 26.8 ..... circumstance, the ingredients to invoke the jurisdiction of hon'ble the chief justice or his delegate under section 11(6) of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 is satisfied. there is an agreement between the parties dated 26.8.2008 wherein the arbitration clause 29 lays down the procedure for appointment ..... legal remuneration towards conduct of the proceedings keeping into account the principle and ceiling laid down under schedule iv of the act of 1996. the arbitration panel would also endeavour to complete the proceedings expeditiously keeping into account the time period prescribed under section 29(a) of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 2017 (SC)

B. Vijaya Bharathi Vs. P. Savitri .

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-10-2017

..... face is that on 13.03.1992 the first defendant ran away from the registering authority making it clear that she did not want to act in furtherance of the agreement in executing a general power of attorney in favour of the plaintiff's husband. the high court was right in stating that no prudent person would stay quiet for a period of ..... for the added reason that despite the fact that it came to the plaintiff's knowledge that there were two registered conveyances prior to the suit, the plaintiff did not amend the suit to ask for a decree of cancellation of the said sale deeds.11) having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we are of the view that ..... favour of the plaintiff's husband and left the sub-registrar's office without registering the general power of attorney.5) thereafter, the property was sold by defendant no.1 on 12.05.1992 to defendant no.2 for a sale consideration of rs. 1,20,000/-. defendant no.2, in turn, sold the property on 05.07.1993 to defendant no.3 for ..... property, the plaintiff did not ask for their cancellation. this again, would stand in the way of a decree of specific performance for unless the sale made by defendant no.1 to defendant no.2, and thereafter by defendant no.2 to defendant no.3 are set aside, no decree for specific performance could possibly follow. while mr. rao may be .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //