Kapil Batra Law Firm

04/04/2018

FIVE point Agenda
If I am elected to the office of President District Bar Association, Jalandhar 2018-2019. My five point agenda will be as hereunder:-
1. Formation of Chamber committee for 3/5 year with the only and sole purpose for formation of chambers for lawyers fulfilling future requirement too with funding from GOVT.
2. Oath commissioner- It will be my effort to get reduced the minimum experience of a lawyer from two year to one year for appointment of oath Commissioner, so that fresh lawyer brother if interested may start earning some money soon.
3. Duty Roster and helpline Number- As like in judiciary here too it will be my effort to fix duty roster of executive members, 2 member every day to attend to the urgent and emergency need and requirement of lawyer member, the said duty will be around the clock. I have felt that sometimes a member is unable to find help from BAR due to non availability, thus to cover the same duty roster will be made.
This duty roster will be available to all members including brothers from Tax side, Non Practicing etc.
4. Trustee- I will act as an trustee of BAR, will not spend even a single penny of the BAR funds except for normal monthly expenses of salaries and bills, all other requirement will be catered from outside efforts.
5. Resignation- If 10 % of the members find and submits in writing that I am not fit for the esteemed office for any reason it may be, I will resign then and there without questioning and calling the house, thus I will not stick to the office unwanted.

Regards
Kapil Batra.
04/04/2018

29/03/2018

Kindly cast your valuable vote in favour of Sh. Kapil Batra, Advocate.

27/03/2018

Accused under S. 138 of NI Act acquitted on grounds of limitation

[K.N. Raju v. Manjunath T.V., Crl. Appeal No. 302 of 2010, decided on 16.3.20

Karnataka High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of K. Somashekar, J., decided a criminal appeal, wherein order of acquittal of the accused passed by the trial court was upheld holding that the recovery of loan in the given case was hit by limitation.

The petitioner was prosecuted for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complainant alleged that the accused took a hand loan from him and issued cheques in lieu thereof. However, when the said cheques were presented in the bank, they were dishonoured and returned with a memo marked ‘insufficient funds’. The complainant issued a demand letter to the accused as required by the Act. However, the accused did not repay the loan even after the demand letter was issued to him. Consequently, the accused was prosecuted under the Act. The trial court, inter alia, found that the time gap between the giving of loan by the complainant to the accused and presenting of cheques for recovery thereof, was more than three years. Trial court held the case to be hit by limitation and acquitted the accused.

The High Court perused the record as well as provisions of the NI Act and the Limitation Act. The Court observed that the limitation period for recovery of a hand loan is three years from the date the loan is given. The Court found that, in the instant case, the loan was given in the year 2004 and the cheques were presented for its recovery only in the year 2008. The Court also held that there was no part repayment of the loan to the complainant by the accused, nor the accused acknowledged the presence of debt in this period to start a fresh period of limitation. The High Court, inter alia, held that the case of the complainant was barred by limitation of three years as provided in the Limitation Act.

Accordingly, the petition filed by the complainant against the order of acquittal of the accused passed by the trial court, was dismissed.

26/03/2018

Kindly vote and support!!!!!

20/03/2018

Supreme Court of India on Tuesday issued directions to prevent the misuse of provisions of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (SC/ST Act). A Two Judge Bench of Justices AK Goel and UU Lalit was examining the question whether there can be procedural safeguar...

02/03/2018

01/10/2017

Mr. Kapil Batra with his client.

30/09/2017

Kapil Batra

▪ *गैगस्टर भालू ने जिस पंचम को मारी पांच गोलियां उसे हाईकोर्ट से बेल, बेल आर्डर लेकर पंचम पहुंचा थाने,देखे, पहली तस्वीर*

punjab news, jalandhar news, india news, news

08/06/2017

When the complaint itself is not maintainable in the absence of the partnership firm being a legal entity before the Court and the cognizance and issue of process against the partners alone is illegal, then there is no question of invoking Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. in such a situation, Justice Pard...

24/05/2017

Law Commission of India in its new report related to bail system, made significant suggestions to change the bail provisions keeping in mind that the poor people do not get bail, and even when bail is granted, it is difficult for them to get sureties. In Report No.268 titled ‘Amendments to Criminal...

14/05/2017

http://www.livelaw.in/counterclaim-can-filed-plaintiff-karnataka-hc-read-judgment/

The Karnataka High Court, in the case of M/S Alliance University vs Sri Sudhir, has noted that a counterclaim can only be filed against the plaintiff and a presenter of the suit cannot be treated as the plaintiff. In the present case, the issue was regarding the chancellorship of Alliance University...