Manuel Sons Financial Enterprises (P) Ltd. Vs Ramakrishnan and Others
.... andatorily insists on a written authority. 11. Supreme Court had occasion to consider the scope of the expression "in writing and signed by the parties" occurring in Order 23 Rule 3 CPC in Byram Pestonji Gariwala Vs. Union Bank of India and others, AIR 1991 SC 2234 : (1991) 2 BC 558 : (1991) 4 ...
High Court Of Kerala
Ved Ram and Another Vs Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Bareilly and Others
.... rule (1), or to withdraw, under sub-rule (3), any suit or part of a claim, without the consent of the other plaintiffs. 15. The only thing which is necessary to be examined before accepting a compromise between the parties is the identity of parties, free will in executing the compromise and unde ...
Allahabad High Court
Munish Sharda and another Vs Bhai Manbir Singh and others
.... come into force by virtue of Government of India Notification No.F.41(40)/67-J, dated the 5th April, 1969, makes the following rules laying down the conditions subject to which an Advocate shall be permitted to practice in the High Court and the Courts subordinate thereto. 1. In these rules unle ...
High Court Of Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh
Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Vs Ganpat Rai and Others
.... e no Vakalatnama on their behalf was filed by him inasmuch as there was no formal order bringing the legal representatives on record. He relied upon various reported judgments and argued that mere presence of Ratan Lai and Hemant Kumar before this Court could not save the appeal from being abated. H ...
Rajasthan High Court
Jayant Madhav Chitale Vs Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. and Others
.... t) or revision or a reference arising from or out of the suit, (xi) any application relating to or incidental to or arising in or out of such appeal or revision or a reference arising from or out of the suit (including an application for leave to appeal under Letters Patent of the High Court or for ...
Bombay High Court
The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vs R. Srinivasan
.... the permission of the Court. (6) No practitioner shall be entitled to act in any civil proceeding, unless he files a vakalatnama in Form No. 1 of the Schedule to these Rules. Provided that - (1) where a practitioner is already on record in any proceeding, it shall be sufficient for another ...
Madras High Court
Sathyanarayana Rao Vs N. Abdul Kareem
.... stamped memo of appearance on behalf of such party. 3. Rule 363 of the MOTOR Vehicles Rules, 1963, enables the Pleader of a party in a proceeding before the Claims Tribunal to prefer an appeal therefrom by signing the memorandum of appeal. Explanation thereto states that the expression "Pleader" ...
Karnataka High Court
Doki Adinarayana Subudhi and Brothers Vs Doki Surya Prakash Rao
.... ribunal, or before any person or other authority mentioned in Section 30 of the Act. Explanation : ''To act'' means to file an appearance or any pleading or application in any Court, or Tribunal, or before any person or other authority mentioned in Section 30 of the Act, or to do any act other th ...
Orissa High Court
Saraswati Vs Tulsi Ram Seth and Others
.... next case in which a similar view was taken in Govind Narain Vs. Smt. Chhoti Devi, where Jagat Narayan, J. held as follows: "A recognised agent of a party is entitled to examine and cross-examine witnesses, as examining and cross-examining a witness is acting and not `pleading''. To plead mea ...
Delhi High Court
Govind Narain Vs Smt. Chhoti Devi
.... ege of pleaders and the intention of the Legislature appears to be that they should not be usurped by private persons. No such considerations can apply in case of the right to cross-examine or examine witnesses. I, therefore, hold that the Judge of the Court below acted wrongly in not permitting the ...
Rajasthan High Court
Get In Touch With Us
We are here to help. Want to learn more about our services? Please get in touch, we'd love to hear from you!
