Adv vinoth pandian law tips

[4/19, 10:04] Vinothpandian: 2015 (1) DRTC 731 : M/ S priya bhatia vs state bank of patiala : Rights of third party.auction purchaser cannot be set at naught because of one time settlement which was on basis of consent of borrower and creditor ( sec 30 RDDBFI act 1993 )
[4/19, 10:04] Vinothpandian: 2021 (1) CTC 180 : jesu ( died ) vs V virgin : Held requirement to file amended copy of plaint is for courts convenience , plaintiff cannot be non – suited for not filing amended copy ( order 6 rule 1 CPC 1908 )
[4/19, 10:04] Vinothpandian: 2020 (6) CTC 198 ; Abhilasha vs parkash SC : Hindu father morally and legally liable to maintain his unmarried daughter , said principle is incorporated in section 20 ( 3) of hindu adoptions and maintenance act 1956
[4/19, 10:04] Vinothpandian: 2020 (4) CTC 549 : shaji purushothaman vs union of india : under section 61(2) of the insolvency and bankruptcy code appeal to be filed within 30 days before NCLAT
[4/19, 10:04] Vinothpandian: 2021 (1) CTC 219 : kaushik chatterjee vs state of haryana SC : At any stage in civil proceedings , plaint can be returned under order 7 rule 10 CPC to be presented before the appropriate court
[4/19, 10:04] Vinothpandian: 2021 (1) CTC 120 : V Alagar vs Inspector general of registration : Held under tamil nadu registration rules rule 55 , Registering authority bound to consider objections raised on grounds specified in rule 55
[4/21, 09:33] Vinothpandian: AIR 2018 SC 980 : dataram singh vs state of uttar pradesh : With regard to a bail application , freedom of an indivdual is of utmost importance and same cannot be curtailed merely on suspicion , till the time guilt of accused is not proved in accordance with law , he is deemed to be innocent , on such grounds bail can be granted
[4/21, 09:33] Vinothpandian: 2018 (1) crimes 91 : Lachhman dass vs Resham chand kaler : It is not expected from the high court to pass mandatory orders commanding the subordinate court to compulsorily grant bail
[4/21, 09:34] Vinothpandian: 2020 (4) CTC 810 : louis sinnaya arokiasamy vs vengadachalam : sec 151 CPC 1908 : Held party which has not approached court with clean hands is not entitled to indulgence of court
[4/21, 09:34] Vinothpandian: AIR 1997 AP 53 : Habeeb khan vs valasula devi : order 6 rule 2 CPC 1908 : Evidence presented before court should be according to the pleadings , irrelevant evidence should be avoided during specific pleadings
[4/21, 09:34] Vinothpandian: 2007 (5) SCC 103 : Raghu lakshminarayanan vs M / S fine tubes : A business concern is not a company within the meaning of sec 141 of NI act
[4/21, 09:34] Vinothpandian: 2007 (1) crimes 228 : Devender singh vs state of haryana : In dowry death cases , it has been held that demand of monetary assistance for domestic purposes not demand of dowry
[4/21, 09:34] Vinothpandian: 2013 (2) DRTC 114 : Nippo foods vs state of punjab & others : In a suit for recovery of bank dues , liability of guarantor dependent upon liability of borrower , principal borrower cannot be permitted to say that amount should be recovered from guarantor and not from principal borrower
[4/21, 09:34] Vinothpandian: 2015 (2) DRTC 836 : Hdfc bank ltd vs prestige educational trust : section 13(4) of SARFASI act not conferred any power on secured creditor to take possession of any assets other than secured assets
[4/24, 06:40] Vinothpandian: 2014 (3) CCC 280 : mohandas panicker vs dakshayani : In a family court proceedings , when adultery on wife is proved , she is not entitled to get any amount as maintenance under section 125 (4) CRPC 1973