[09/09, 10:14] Vinothpandian: AIR 1991 BOm 105 : leela vs mahadeo : An advocate can be permitted to represent in family court ,and permission cannot be refused in absence of convincing reason[09/09, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2019(4) BC 1 SC : Bajarang shyam sundar Agarwal vs central bank of india : SARFASI act ; If any of tenants claim that he is entitled to possession of secured asset for term of more than year it has to be supported by execution of registered instrument ,if tenant relied on unregistered instrument or oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possession ,tenant is not entitled to possession of secured asset for more than period prescribed under sec 107 of TP act[09/09, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2018(2) BC 323 : Bal Krishnan Rawat vs pyare lal Nepta : NI act sec 138 : Acquittal of accused without adjudicating case on merits due to non – appearance of complainant on date of defence evidence ,who was sincerely pursuing his remedy is improper[09/09, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2018(3) BC 389 ; India affordable housing solutions vs konmark infra developers : oral plea to contradict written agreement is not tenable in terms of section 91 of evidence act[09/09, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2017(1) CTC 729 (DB) : Jaffar sait vs union of india : service law : discretion conferred to disciplinary authority to place officer under suspension till termination of criminal proceedings should be exercised objectively ,protracted suspension without any valid reason is bad in law
[09/09, 10:14] Vinothpandian: AIR 1991 BOm 105 : leela vs mahadeo : An advocate can be permitted to represent in family court ,and permission cannot be refused in absence of convincing reason
[09/09, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2019(4) BC 1 SC : Bajarang shyam sundar Agarwal vs central bank of india : SARFASI act ; If any of tenants claim that he is entitled to possession of secured asset for term of more than year it has to be supported by execution of registered instrument ,if tenant relied on unregistered instrument or oral agreement accompanied by delivery of possession ,tenant is not entitled to possession of secured asset for more than period prescribed under sec 107 of TP act
[09/09, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2018(2) BC 323 : Bal Krishnan Rawat vs pyare lal Nepta : NI act sec 138 : Acquittal of accused without adjudicating case on merits due to non – appearance of complainant on date of defence evidence ,who was sincerely pursuing his remedy is improper
[09/09, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2018(3) BC 389 ; India affordable housing solutions vs konmark infra developers : oral plea to contradict written agreement is not tenable in terms of section 91 of evidence act
[09/09, 10:14] Vinothpandian: 2017(1) CTC 729 (DB) : Jaffar sait vs union of india : service law : discretion conferred to disciplinary authority to place officer under suspension till termination of criminal proceedings should be exercised objectively ,protracted suspension without any valid reason is bad in law
