[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Under the provisions of Section 5 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, no adoption can be made by or to a Hindu except in accordance with the provisions contained in the said Act, and any adoption made in contravention of the said provisions shall be void, which means of no legal effect. So, firstly check whether your adoption meets the mandatory requirements of the said Act. Consult a local lawyer if you are not able to do it yourself. If your adoption is not in accordance with the provisions of the said Act, then the adoption itself being void, there should be no problem if you use the name of your biological father.

However, if your adoption is legally valid under the provisions of the above Act, then please note that Section 12 of the said Act lays down that, “An adopted child shall be deemed to be the child of his or her adoptive father or mother for all purposes with effect from the date of the adoption and from such date all the ties of the child in the family of his or her birth shall be deemed to be severed and replaced by those created by the adoption in the adoptive family”. Therefore, in such a situation, it may not be legally permissible to use the name of your biological father as being your father, since you would be considered as child of your adoptive father and mother (nana and nani, respectively, in your case) for all purposes.

For your second question, appear in the court which issued the NBW (non-bailable warrant) and get the NBW cancelled by binding yourself for appearing on the designated dates in future. If needed, take your advocate with you when you appear in court.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

As far as my knowledge goes, there is no Bill pending at present in the Parliament for amendment to the Negotiable Instruments Act including Section 138 thereof relating to cheque bounce.

And, the last amendment Bill to amend this Act was passed by Parliament in the year 2015, which came into effect from 15^th June 2015.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Firstly, when you settled the matter with him, you should have taken back all the previous blank cheques given to him. Only on this condition, you should have settled the matter. And, if he had said that he had already destroyed the earlier cheques, then that fact should have been specifically recorded in the MOU which should have been signed by both parties, recording that there was no cheque outstanding with him (or that there was no other cheque outstanding with him barring the specified cheques).

Secondly, you have said that he sent a legal notice to you for bouncing of a cheque showing outstanding balance of Rs. 129482, against which you have now given him 5 cheques. So, if there are no further transactions between the two of you, then this outstanding balance cannot exceed the above amount (except for interest, if any).

Since a cheque bounce case can be made out only if the cheque was issued for discharge of any debt or liability, and since there is no further outstanding balance, if at all any new case is filed against you, you can take the defence of there being no debt or liability.

Note: With regard to the last part of your question, let me tell you that there is no charge for asking publicly open questions at Tilak Marg Forum. It is absolutely free.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

The basic principle of considering deposits in bank accounts during the check period in a case of disproportionate assets [Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988] is this. Whatever accumulation of money / property has taken place during the check period is only required to be taken into consideration as the assets of the accused public servant. For this purpose, whatever balance in a bank account was available at the commencement of the check period is not to be included. The balance at the end of the check period is seen and it is added to the assets. If there was some balance in the same account on the date of commencement of the check period, then that is shown in the previous assets (prior to check period). The total of previous assets is then deducted from the total assets existing at the end of the check period. This would give the figure for the assets of the public servant acquired during the check period. In fact, if there is any interest accrued during the check period in a bank account, that is added to the income (as interest income). This would ensure that only the actual amount deposited (including that coming by transfer) by the public servant in a bank account during the check period is considered as a part of his assets, since the extent of disproportion is calculated by comparing the assets (plus expenditure) and income.

If computation in your case has been made in violation of this principle, then it is wrong. I cannot comment on the facts of your case and also whether you’ll get success in your case, in the absence of having seen the detailed documents and full facts of the case. Please consult some local lawyer having expertise in such type of cases.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

There is no hard and fast rule. The period taken for giving judgment copy differs from court to court, depending on various factors including availability of staff and pendency. Many a time, it takes more than a month also, while sometimes it is given in 2-3 days. Have patience and contact the concerned court staff.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) deals with the power of the court to strike out or add parties at any stage of the proceedings:

“(2) Court may strike out or add parties.— The Court may at any stage of the proceedings, either upon or without the application of either party, and on such terms as may appear to the Court to be just, order that the name of any party improperly joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, be struck out, and that the name of any person who ought to have been joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, or whose presence before the Court may be necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit, be added.”

In the case of Mumbai International Airport (P) Ltd. v. Regency Convention Centre & Hotels (P) Ltd., (2010) 7 SCC 417, the Supreme Court held as under:

“The general rule in regard to impleadment of parties is that the plaintiff in a suit, being dominus litis, may choose the persons against whom he wishes to litigate and cannot be compelled to sue a person against whom he does not seek any relief. Consequently, a person who is not a party has no right to be impleaded against the wishes of the plaintiff. But this general rule is subject to the provisions of Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (“the Code”, for short), which provides for impleadment of proper or necessary parties.”

“The said provision makes it clear that a court may, at any stage of the proceedings (including suits for specific performance), either upon or even without any application, and on such terms as may appear to it to be just, direct that any of the following persons may be added as a party: (a) any person who ought to have been joined as plaintiff or defendant, but not added; or (b) any person whose presence before the court may be necessary in order to enable the court to effectively and completely adjudicate upon and settle the questions involved in the suit. In short, the court is given the discretion to add as a party, any person who is found to be a necessary party or proper party.”

“A “necessary party” is a person who ought to have been joined as a party and in whose absence no effective decree could be passed at all by the court. If a “necessary party” is not impleaded, the suit itself is liable to be dismissed. A “proper party” is a party who, though not a necessary party, is a person whose presence would enable the court to completely, effectively and adequately adjudicate upon all matters in dispute in the suit, though he need not be a person in favour of or against whom the decree is to be made. If a person is not found to be a proper or necessary party, the court has no jurisdiction to implead him, against the wishes of the plaintiff. The fact that a person is likely to secure a right/interest in a suit property, after the suit is decided against the plaintiff, will not make such person a necessary party or a proper party to the suit for specific performance.”

In the case of Pratap Singh v. Rahul Gupta, (2013) 135 DRJ 330 (Del) : (2013) 199 DLT 78 (Del), Delhi High Court held that a wide discretion has been conferred on the Court in order to decide whether to strike off any party from the suit, who has been indecorously joined either as a plaintiff or defendant or to include the name of any person, whose presence is found to be necessary by the Court to effectively and completely adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit. The Court further held that the discretion to be exercised by the Court not quixotically but based on sound judicial principles of law after taking into consideration the facts of the case. The effectual and complete adjudication and settlement of all the questions involved in the suit is the primary test to decide as to whether the impleadment of any party to a suit is required or not. Delhi High Court further held that the Court has the discretion either to allow or reject an application of a person claiming to be a proper party, depending upon the facts and circumstances and no person has a right to insist that he should be impleaded as a party, merely because he so wishes.

As far as my understanding goes, it is desirable that the impleadment application should be decided before deciding the civil suit on merits. In particular, if the person filing the impleadment application is a necessary party or a proper party, then it should be necessary to first decide such application before deciding the civil suit. But, if the impleadment application has been filed by a person who is not a necessary party or a proper party (or if he is a complete stranger), then, perhaps, the situation may be slightly different.

In your case, if the impleadment application has been filed by a necessary or proper party, then, in my considered opinion, the court should have decided such application before deciding the civil suit on merits.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

I have covered the issue of Cancellation or revocation of registered gift deed of immovable property. Please read that since it covers your question substantially. As I have mentioned in the above reply, once a gift of an immovable property has been registered, it cannot be revoked by the donor at his will. Moreover, if there is a clause in the gift deed that it could be revoked at the will of the donor in future, then such gift deed itself is void.

Please note that mutation in respect of an immovable property is basically the act of taking on record the ownership of the property. The moment the gift deed is registered, the title passes to the donee from the donor. Mutation may give proof of this transfer of title, but even in the absence of mutation, the title would have already been transferred to the donee on the competition of registration of the gift deed.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Limitation for filing the SLP is 90 days.

Chances of SLP getting admitted are generally very less. In majority of SLPs, the Supreme Court does NOT issue notice and dismiss them on the first date.

If you don’t approach the Supreme Court or if the SC does not entertain your SLP and dismisses it, then that is the end of the matter (though one can file Review Petition and subsequently Curative Petition also, in the SC, but their chances are even further less. See: Success Rate of Review Petition and Curative Petition in Supreme Court). So, if you are going to approach the SC, then make your best efforts by covering all possible grounds.     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

As I have mentioned in my previous reply, he can get bail at the earlier stage itself. But, of course, it is the discretion of the concerned court.      

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

You may apply for getting certified copies of the documents from the court concerned, if those documents are in that court.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Since the review petition against the original judgment of the high court has also been dismissed by that court, you have no other option but to challenge the same in the Supreme Court by way of filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP). Otherwise, the order of the high court would become binding.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Please note that in the circumstances mentioned by you, as per the rules applicable to Central Government employees (rules should be similar for BSNL employees, I presume), the family pension shall not be payable to more than one member of the family at the same time. As per the rules, if a deceased Government servant or pensioner leaves behind a widow, the family pension shall become payable to the widow, failing which to the eligible child. Therefore, till the widow of the retired employee survives, the child of the employee is not entitled to any family pension. In view of this, at present, your sister would not be eligible for family pension and such family pension would be payable only to your mother till she is alive.

Also see, Family pension to unmarried daughter of more than 25 years age.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Firstly, you have not clarified whether the employee is a Government employee or a private sector employee or a PSU employee. The suspension rules may differ from employer to employer. Anyway, let me try to reply to your question, presuming that the employee is working under the Central Government (the rules are generally similar for most State Governments and PSUs also).

As per the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, a Government servant may be placed under suspension in the following situations-

• where  a disciplinary proceeding against him is contemplated or is pending; or 
• where he has engaged himself in activities prejudicial to the interest of the security of the State; or
• where a case against him in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation, inquiry or trial:

In addition to the above situations, a Government servant shall be deemed to have been placed under suspension if he is detained in custody, whether on a criminal charge or otherwise, for a period exceeding 48 hours, or if he is convicted in a case with sentence of more than 48 hours.

In your question, you have not clarified as to whether the employee is found with a stranger lady in any objectionable / compromising position or in a normal manner. So, ultimately, it would depend on the facts of the case and also in the discretion of the authority concerned. If the authority is of the opinion that the employee is indulging in immoral activities which is against the discipline and conduct expected of the employee and has brought bad name to the department, it may in its discretion, consider suspension of the employee, if it is coming within the above guidelines.     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Firstly, you have not clarified whether the employee is a Government employee or a private sector employee or a PSU employee. The suspension rules may differ from employer to employer. Anyway, let me try to reply to your question, presuming that the employee is working under the Central Government (the rules are generally similar for most State Governments and PSUs also).

As per the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, a Government servant may be placed under suspension in the following situations-

• where  a disciplinary proceeding against him is contemplated or is pending; or 
• where he has engaged himself in activities prejudicial to the interest of the security of the State; or
• where a case against him in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation, inquiry or trial:

In addition to the above situations, a Government servant shall be deemed to have been placed under suspension if he is detained in custody, whether on a criminal charge or otherwise, for a period exceeding 48 hours, or if he is convicted in a case with sentence of more than 48 hours.

In your question, you have not clarified as to whether the employee is found with a stranger lady in any objectionable / compromising position or in a normal manner. So, ultimately, it would depend on the facts of the case and also in the discretion of the authority concerned. If the authority is of the opinion that the employee is indulging in immoral activities which is against the discipline and conduct expected of the employee and has brought bad name to the department, it may in its discretion, consider suspension of the employee, if it is coming within the above guidelines.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Firstly, please note that offences under both the sections mentioned by you, i.e., Section 500 (defamation) and Section 507 (Criminal intimidation by anonymous communication or having taken precaution to conceal whence the threat comes) are non-cognizable and the police does not have the power to register FIR and start investigation on its own. So, it is doubtful whether FIR would have been registered under these two sections by the police, and there appears to be something missing in your question.

Anyway, presuming that the information given by you is correct, after submission of the charge sheet in the court, usually copy of the charge sheet (along with other papers) is given to the accused at the time of his first appearance in court. From the question, it appears that you have not been summoned to appear before the court so far though the charge sheet has apparently been filed on 6^th October 2017. So, you may wait till you are asked to appear in the court, At the time of your appearance in the court, as and when you are asked to appear, you may get copy of the charge sheet along with other papers, such as statements of the witnesses and documents.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Author]

Posts