Only logged in customers who have purchased this product may leave a review.
- You can't purchase more than 5 items in a day.
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!
SUMMARY SUIT BASED ON DISHONOURED CHEQUES
This is a precedent of Summary Suit to be filed under the provisions of Order XXXVII Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 for recovery of the amount based on the dishonoured cheques.
₹350 (30% OFF) Add to Cart - Sale!
AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 17 OF THE SECUTARISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002 BY A THIRD PARTY WHO IS NEITHER BORROWER NOR GUARANTOR
The Bank/Financial Institution has issued a Notice u/s. 13 (2) of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and threatening to take actions under the same against the property of a third party who is neither a borrower nor a guarantor nor in any manner responsible to Bank/ Financial Institution. This is a precedent of an application under Section 17 of the Secutarisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 by a third party to be filed before Debt Recovery Tribunal challenging the said action of the Bank/Financial Institution.
₹525 (30% OFF) Preview HereAdd to Cart - Sale!
AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 17 OF THE SECUTARISATION 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 Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and threatening to take actions under the same. This is a precedent of an application under Section 17 of the Secutarisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 to be filed before Debt Recovery Tribunal challenging the said action of the Bank/Financial Institution.
₹700 (30% OFF) Preview HereAdd to Cart - Sale!
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL TO BE FILED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ALONGWITH FORM NO. 35 (Rule 45) UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 AGAINST THE ASSESSING OFFICER’S ORDER U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT
The Assessing Officer has passed an Order against the Assessee u/s 143 of The Income Tax Act. Now this needs to be challenged further. This is the precedent of Statement of Facts and Grounds of Appeal to be filed before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) along with 35 [Rule 45] against the Order of the Assessing Officer.
₹525 (30% OFF) Add to Cart - Sale!
APPEAL FROM ORDER TO BE FILED BEFORE THE SUPEIROR COURT AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LOWER CIVIL COURT IN AN APPLICATION FOR INTERIM RELIEFS
Appeal from Order is to be filed against certain orders passed in a suit before its final decision as provided under Section 104 read with Order 43, Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.The trial court has passed an interim order and which is required to be challenged before the higher or superior court. This is the precedent for the same.
₹700 (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!
REPLY UNDER SECTION 13 (3A) OF SARFAESI, 2002 OF THE BORROWER/GUARANTORS TO STATUTORY NOTICE OF BANK/FINANCIAL INSTITUTION UNDER SECTION 13 (2) OF SARFAESIA, 2002
This is a precedent of reply under Section 13 (3A) of Sarfaesi, 2002 of the Borrower/Guarantors to statutory notice of Bank/Financial Institution under Section 13 (2) of Sarfaesi, 2002
₹525 (30% OFF) Add to Cart - 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!
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!
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!
THE DECREE/ JUDGMENT PASSED BY ANY APPELLATE CIVIL COURT IN THE FIRSTÂ APPEALÂ WHICH COURT IS SUBORDINATE TO HIGH COURT CAN BE CHALLENGED BY WAY OF AÂ SECOND APPEALÂ 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!
COUNTER STATEMENT TO THE NOTICE OF OPPOSITION TO THE REGISTRATION OF THE TRADE MARK
This is the precedent of 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.