Legal drafting

  BEFORE THE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL/LABOUR COURT,  To,                         Mr. Dewan Chand Arya, Proprietor of M/s Ramson Auto Metals, Shed No. A-850, Near nChungi No. 17, Dabua Colony, NIT, Faridabad. Subject:   Demand Notice U/s 2-A of Industrial Disputes Act. Sir, I, __________________was appointed as Die Maker in the year 1990 and has been  promoted as Senior Die Maker in the year 2001 and my last drawn salary  was Rs. 15000/-.  That I worked almost 16 years in your company continuously  without any break. During my service period, my work was quite  satisfactory. That you have not paid my salary from the period of 01.03.2010 to 31.05.2010 alongwith the overtime of 4 hours per day as well as terminal benefits as per Shop & Factory Acts which comes to Rs. 2,42,500/-. I requested you to pay my salary alongwith the overtime of 4 hours per day, but you did not pay my ear

FORMAT OF BAIL BOND U/S 437 A CR.P.C. BOND & BAIL BOND FOR ATTENDANCE BEFORE THE APPELLANT COURT.   IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF SH. ___________________________ STATE V/S Rahim etc. F.I.R. No. U/S- P.S.                                                                                 BAIL BOND U/S 437 A CR.P.C.                                                                                           PERSONAL BOND I, Ajay son of Sh._____________________, having been acquitted by this Hon’ble court on dated 27-10-2017 in the above noted case and required to give surety for my attendance before the Hon’ble court on the condition that I shall attend the Hon’ble Appellant court on each and every date of the hearing in which any appeal is filed against the Judgment and order of acquittal passed by this Hon’ble court and in case making any default therein I shall undertake to forfeit to the Govt. of India the sum of

Format of Legal notice to a telecom company on account of deactivating the mobile services  The legal notice is sent to Reliance Jio Infocomm Limited and Jio Center, Anantpur, by Mr. Vijay Kumar, who claims to be a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act. He states that his mobile number, which he ported to Reliance Jio, was deactivated twice without any reason or explanation, causing him inconvenience and financial losses. He demands the restoration of his mobile number and a compensation of Rs. 50,000 for mental agony and harassment. The notice warns of legal action if the demands are not met within seven days of receipt. Description: This blog discusses the legal case of a Reliance Jio customer whose mobile services were deactivated without any valid reason, causing mental tension, agony, and harassment. The article examines the rights of consumers under the Consumer Protection Act and how the customer sought compensation for the deficient services. It provides insights into the

DEED OF DIVORCE The Deed of Divorce was executed between Smt. A and Shri B who got married six months ago according to Muslim rites and ceremonies. Due to family and temperamental differences and false cases and litigations launched by the parents of the first party, both parties agreed to dissolve their marriage by way of this Talaqnama/Divorce Deed according to Muslim Shariat Law. B has given Talaq to A by saying it thrice. The contents of the deed were read and accepted in the presence of family members, arbitrators/elders, and witnesses. However it is wroth to note that the five-judge bench of the Supreme Court declared the practice of Triple Talaq unconstitutional by a 3:2 majority and directed the legislature to take measures against it in order to stop the abuse against women. This deed of Divorce has been executed at ______on this 9th day of March, 2016 between : 1- Smt. A  (hereinafter called the FIRST PARTY ) AND 2- Sh. B  (hereinafter called the SECOND PARTY)

Application Under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 for execution of the Order dated 10-06-2010  passed by the Hon’ble Forum. In the present case, the complaint was filed by the complainant, Jaiboon against M/s ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. The order was passed by the Hon’ble Forum in 2010, directing the respondents to pay Rs. 2,74,444/- to the complainant towards damage to his vehicle along with interest @ 9% per annum and further Rs. 3300/- as cost of litigation. However, the respondents failed to comply with the order intentionally and deliberately, and hence an application under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 for execution of the order was filed by the complainant. The prayer requested the execution of the decree holder and the amount of Rs. 3,66,719/- along with future interest at the rate 9% per annum may kindly be ordered to be recovered from the judgment debtor by way o

Format of complaint under section 12 of the consumer protection act, 1986 In the following case the complainant, Kammu, filed a case against Cholamandalam General Insurance Company Limited before the President District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The complainant owned a TATA SUMO vehicle insured with the respondent, and after an accident, the complainant informed the respondent and requested their surveyor, but they did not visit the spot. The vehicle was repaired at different workshops, and the complainant spent around Rs. 100,000. The complainant submitted the claim form with all the bills and documents as directed, but the respondent did not make the payment of the amount of damages, causing the complainant mental agony and harassment. The complainant claimed a compensation amount of Rs.50,000/- from the respondent. The respondent neither gave any reply nor made the payment of the damaged vehicle and compensation to the com