LexLords NRI Legal Services In USA By NRI Legal Services LexLords
NRI legal services, https://lexlords.com/objections-jurisdiction-nri-property-case/. This provision even if read liberally does not provide for reservation for in-service candidates, but only of giving a weightage in the form of incentive marks as specified to the class of in- service candidates (who have served in notified remote and difficult areas in the State). 807 of 1999, dated 03. Admittedly, the reservation for the OBC category will not apply to the recruitment of GDS to the cadre of Postman in the instant O.
35 of 1944 of the Court NRI Legal Services of the Subordinate Judge, Tinnevelly. On 30th November, 1941, the plaintiff appellant was made a nominee by the purchaser for purposes of the contract and although he brought the present suit in the character of a nominee, it has been held by the trial judge as well as by the lower appellate court, that he was really an assignee of Bejoy Krishna Roy in respect to the latter's rights under the contract.
This appointment is legally untenable because the claim of the applicants for appointment against unreserved vacancies, on account of their having higher merit than the part respondents cannot be ignored. We thus, hold that the order of the Tribunal is erroneous. , the interpretation of the Agreement between the parties and the obligation of the respondent to declare availability of generated power in the ratio of 58 : 42 and consequence of default therein.
In November, 1943, the company addressed a letter to Bejoy Krishna Roy informing him of the requisitioning of the lands by the Government and stating inter alia that a considerable portion of the land-appertaining to the scheme was taken possession of by the Government and there was no knowing how long the Government would retain possession of the same. The court implies a term or exception and treats that as part of the contract.
The said order has given rise to the substantial question of law which has been discussed above, i. As it is open to the father to make a gift or partition of his properties as he himself chooses, there is, strictly speaking, no presumption that he intended either the one or the other. The Tribunal erroneously held that there was no pleading for making the claim. while a third order of requisition, which related to the balance of the land comprised in the scheme, was passed sometime later.
Thus, the Tribunal has committed error of law as well as of record in recording its finding as demonstrated above. Therefore, there is no justification for transferring the unreserved vacancies to the OBC category. It may also be noted that the Commission has left actual working out of the loss to be worked out separately and on that basis the appellant has already filed its claim which was pending consideration before the Commission. In other words, the question would be whether the grantor really wanted to make a gift of his properties or to partition the same.
That being so, the appointment of the party respondents 4 to 7 is against unreserved vacancies. It seems necessary however to clear up some misconception which is likely to arise because of the complexities of the English law on the subject. The law of frustration in England developed, as is well known, under the guise of reading implied terms into contracts. The Tribunal further held that the order of the Full Bench of the Tribunal passed in O.
Some time before this date, there was an order passed by the Collector, 24-Parganas, on 12th of November, 1941 under section 79 of the Defence of India Rules, on the strength of which a portion of the land covered by the scheme was requisitioned for military purposes. It was distinguished on the ground that the question before the Full Bench was with respect to filling up of those 25% of total vacancies notified for the post of Postman, which were to be filled on the basis of seniority, and thus, pertained to Column 11(2)(i) of the Recruitment Rules, whereas the controversy in the instant case was with respect to the other 25% of the total vacancies, which were to be filled on the basis of merit in the departmental examination and thus, pertained to Column 11(2)(ii) of the Recruitment Rules.
The material question which the court( would have to decide in such cases is, whether taking the document and all the relevant facts into consideration, it could be said that the donor intended to confer a bounty upon his son exclusively for his benefit and capable of being dealt with by him at his pleasure or that the apparent gift was an integral part of a scheme for partition and what was given to the son was really the share of the property which would normally be allotted to him and in his branch of the family on partition.
1999, holding that the appointment of Extra Departmental Agents to the post of Postman was by way of direct recruitment and NRI Legal Services not promotion was not applicable to the facts of the instant case. The said proceeding can now be revived in the light of our finding. Appeal from the Judgment and Decree dated the 15th day of July, 1949, of the High Court of Judicature at Madras (Rajamannar C. If the Recruitment Rules for Postman/ Mail Guard are read keeping the entire scheme of promotion in view then the method of recruitment of GDS to the cadre of Postman through departmental examination is to be treated as merit based selection on promotion only.
Consequently, the nature of the unfulfilled unreserved vacancies in the departmental quota when added to the merit quota of GDS will remain the same as unreserved. Stress would certainly( have to be laid on the substance of the disposition and not on its mere form. 255 along with the surrounding circumstances in accordance with the wellknown canons of construction. Another part of the land was requisitioned by the Government on 20th of December, 1941.
