Only logged in customers who have purchased this product may leave a review.
Sale! 
AN APPEAL BEFORE DRAT CHALLENGING THE INTERIM ORDER OF THE DRT
₹700 (30% OFF)
This is a precedent of an appeal before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal Challenging the interim order of the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 20 of the Recovery of Debt due to Bank and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.
Recommended based on your search
- Sale!
APPEAL UNDER SECTION 15-T OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ACT, 1992, BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (SAT) CHALLENGING THE ORDER (PENALTIES AND ADJUDICATION) OF SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA PASSED UNDER CHAPTER VIA OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ACT, 1992
This is a precedent of an appeal under section 15-T of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, before the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) challenging the order (Penalties and Adjudication) of Securities and Exchange Board of India passed under Chapter via of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992.
₹525 (30% OFF) Preview HereAdd to Cart - Sale!
NOTICE TO BORROWERS AND THE GUARANTORS UNDER SECTION 13 (2) OF SARFAESIA, 2002 BY BANKS/FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
This is a precedent of notice by the Banks/Financial Institutions to the Borrower and the guarantors under Section 13 (2) of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
₹350 (30% OFF) Add to Cart - Sale!
APPEAL BEFORE THE SESSIONS COURT U/S. 374(3) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION BY MAGISTRATE’S COURT
The person is convicted by the Learned Magistrate’s Court. The Appeal is to be preferred. This is the precedent of an Appeal before the Sessions Court u/s. 374(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the Judgment and Order of Conviction by Magistrate’s Court.
₹700 (30% OFF) Preview HereAdd to Cart - Sale!
THE DECREE/ JUDGMENT PASSED BY ANY APPELLATE CIVIL COURT IN THE FIRST APPEAL WHICH COURT IS SUBORDINATE TO HIGH COURT CAN BE CHALLENGED BY WAY OF A SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE HIGH COURT IF THE CASE INVOLVES A SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW (SECTION 100 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908)
"The decree/ judgment passed by any appellate Civil Court in the first appeal which court is sub-ordinate to High Court can be challenged by way of a second appeal before the High Court provided the case involves a substantial question of law. This is a precedent of Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908."
₹700 (30% OFF) Preview HereAdd to Cart - Sale!
GROUNDS OF APPEAL TO BE FILED BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALONGWITH FORM NO. 36 [Rule 47(1)] UNDER SECTION 253 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under the Income Tax Act has passed an Order against the Assessee. Now this needs to be challenged further. This is the precedent of Grounds of Appeal to be filed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal along with Form No.36 [Rule 47(1)] under Section 253 The Income Tax Act against the Order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)
₹700 (30% OFF) Add to Cart - Sale!
A SECURITISATION APPEAL TO DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002.
The Bank/Financial Institution has issued a notice u/s 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and threatening to take actions under the same. A Securitisation Application u/s. 17 of the said Act was filed by the Borrower before Debt Recovery Tribunal which is rejected. This is a precedent of an appeal u/s 18 of the said Act to Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal challenging the said Order of Debt Recovery Tribunal.
₹525 (30% OFF) Preview HereAdd to Cart - Sale!
SUMMARY SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF AMOUNT FOR GOODS SOLD AND DELIVERED
This is the precedent of Summary Suit to be filed under the provisions of Order XXXVII Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 before appropriate court for recovery of amount for goods sold and delivered.
₹350 (30% OFF) Add to Cart - Sale!
SUIT BEFORE THE SMALL CAUSES COURT FOR RECOVERY OF POSSESSION ON THE GROUND THAT THE TENANT HAS NOT USED THE PREMISES FOR A CONTINUOUS PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX MONTHS UNDER SECTION 16(1)(n) OF THE MAHARASHTRA RENT CONTROL ACT, 1999
This is a precedent of an eviction suit to be filed before the Small Causes Court or before the court of civil judge for recovery of possession of the tenanted premises on the ground that the Tenant has not used the said premises for a continuous period of more than six months as contemplated under section 16(1)(n) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.
₹700 (30% OFF) Add to Cart - Sale!
AN APPLICATION TO THE RECOVERY OFFICER OF THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL FOR RAISING THE ATTACHMENT LEVIED ON THIRD PARTY’S PROPERTY
This is a precedent of an Application to the Recovery Officer of the Debt Recovery Tribunal for raising the attachment levied on Third Party’s property.
₹525 (30% OFF) Add to Cart - Sale!
RERA – APPEAL TO APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF MEMBER/ADJUDICATING OFFICER
This is a precedent of an Appeal to be filed before The Real Estate Appellate Tribunal against the Order of member/adjudicating officer under the provisions of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA).
₹525 (30% OFF) Preview HereAdd to Cart - Sale!
APPEAL UNDER SECTION 58 (4) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 READ WITH RULE 70 OF THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL RULES, 2016 AGAINST THE COMPANY’S REFUSAL TO TRANSFER THE SAID SHARES
The equity shares in a Public Limited Company is standing in the name of the deceased. The Petitioner is legally entitled to the same. However, the Company has refused to transfer the said shares in favour of the Petitioner without sufficient cause. This is a standard precedent of Appeal under Section 58(4) of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 70 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 against the Company’s refusal to transfer the said shares.
₹525 (30% OFF) Add to Cart - Sale!
AFFIDAVIT OF EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF COUNTER STATEMENT TO THE NOTICE OF OPPOSITION TO THE REGISTRATION OF THE TRADE MARK
This is the precedent of an Affidavit of Evidence in support of the Counter Statement (by the Applicant) to the Notice of Opposition filed under Trade Marks Act, 1999 opposing the registration of the Trade Mark advertised in Trade Journal.
₹420 (30% OFF) Add to Cart
Reviews
There are no reviews yet.