APPLICABILITIES OF LABOUR LAWS TO TRAINEES IN INDIA

Dear Client, A trainee is not treated as an employee in the permanent role of the Company, so standing rules or regulations do not apply to the trainee to regulate or resolve the dispute between a trainee and an employer. Moreover, in the absence of a specific stipulation in the appointment letter about the notice period required for resignation, the company cannot force a trainee to serve a notice period who tendered his resignation upon completion of his training which amounts to unfair labour practices. Although you are not a workman under the I D Act, still you can approach the concerned Labour Commissioner of the State Govt. for redressal of your grievance against the unfair labour practices of the Company.

Dear Client, From the prolonged content of your query, it appears you are extremely aggrieved with the service of the service provider and decided to move the Court for relief. On detection of defects in the product, post-purchase is termed and defined under Sec.2(34) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as "Product Liability" which means the responsibility of a product manufacturer or product seller/service centre, to compensate for any harm caused to the consumer/customer by such defective product manufactured or sold or for a deficiency in services relating thereto. Chapter VI, Section 82 to Section 87 of the Consumer Protection Act deals with product liability and So, in the given scenario, serving a strong legal notice to both Service Provider and the product manufacturer, you can file a complaint against them over alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practices before the District Consumer Commission under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 claiming replacement of the vehicle or refund of the cost of the vehicle including the expenses incurred towards repairing/servicing along with compensation for harassment and cost of litigation. As per Section 69 of the CPA, the complaint should be filed within two years from the date of the cause of action. Since you have been facing a deficiency in service since 2017 up to now, your claim is now barred by limitation. So, you have to file a petition seeking condonation of delay on the grounds of continued cause of action along with your complaint petition and lead the evidence to justify your claim before the Commission. If required, hire the service of an experienced Advocate handling consumer cases to navigate the issue in the right way.

As per law father is the natural guardian of child above 5 years. Fluency in English does not mean that person is intelligent and sane. Many people like from china, Japan, USSR, Israel etc uses translator to communicate. 1. Since child is born in India hence till 18 he can have be Indian citizen or be Australian citizen and on attaining 18 child shall have option to choose citizenship of either country. 2. Yes. 3. Yes. On attaining 18 years he shall have option to choose citizenship of either country. 4. You cannot stop a person from filing case but you have right to defend and also to take precautions to save yourself from such frivolous cases.

Dear Client, Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 prescribe penalties or punishments for giving or taking dowry by either party in a marriage and are enacted to protect women who face the evil of dowry demand. As per Section 3(1) of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, if any person, after the commencement of this Act, gives or takes or abets the giving or taking of dowry, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years, and with fine which shall not be less than fifteen thousand rupees or the amount of the value of such dowry, whichever is more. Thus the provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act(DPA) provide limited protection to the givers of dowry seeking to file a complaint under this law. Under Section 7(3), of the DPA, prosecutions under this law cannot be initiated based on statements made by a person aggrieved. Apart from this, you can file a complaint against your husband and his other family members who subjected you to domestic violence in the local police station under Section 12 of the PWDV Act, 2005. An aggrieved person or a Protection Officer or any other person on behalf of the aggrieved person may present an application directly to the Magistrate seeking one or more reliefs under this Act that include the right to reside in the shared household, prohibitory/restraining order and residence order. You can file a private complaint against the persons in the court of the Magistrate under Section 223 of BNSS which outlines the procedure for a Magistrate to take cognizance of an offence. Upon receiving a complaint, the Magistrate shall examine the complainant and any witnesses present. This examination is conducted under oath, and the substance of the examination is documented and signed by the complainant, witnesses, and the Magistrate. If the Magistrate finds sufficient grounds for proceeding with the case, he may issue a summons or warrant to the accused under Section 227 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023. Given the proposition of relevant laws, you may consult with an Advocate for guidance and steps to navigate the issue in the right way.

Dear Client, In reference to Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure,(CPC) 1908, a foreign judgment shall be conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon between the same parties or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title except (a) where it has not been pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction means the law under which parties are married, recognises. Any other court would be court without jurisdiction, unless both parties voluntarily and unconditionally subject themselves to the jurisdiction of that Court. Further, the ground of divorce in the decision of the foreign court should be a ground available under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Cruelty is a settled ground amongst other for a decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. But the same cannot be said for “irretrievable breakdown of marriage”, as this is not a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Section 44A of CPC deals with the execution of decrees passed by courts in reciprocating territory means any country or territory outside India which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be a reciprocating territory for the purposes of this section; and “superior Courts”, with reference to any such territory, means such Courts as may be specified in the said notification. So, in the absence of such notification, execution of foreign court's decree is not admissible for execution in India. Further, as per sub-section 3 of Section 44A CPC, the District Court shall refuse execution of any such decree, if it is shown to the satisfaction of the Court that the decree falls within any of the exceptions specified in clauses (a) to (f) of section 13 of CPC that outlines the conditions under which a foreign judgment is not considered conclusive in India. The division bench of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court relied on the Supreme Court's 1991 landmark decision in Y. Narasimha Rao v. Venkata Lakshmi, held that a Hindu marriage conducted in India in accordance with religious ceremonies and customs will always be governed by the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) and cannot be governed by any other law even if the parties acquire a new domicile or citizenship of any country in the world. Further, in the case of "Sheenam Raheja v. Amit Wadhwa" (2012, 131 DRJ 568), the Delhi High Court in reference to the aforementioned Supreme Court's ruling in "Y. Narmasimha Rao (1991, 3 SCC 451), concluded that if a marriage was solemnized and registered under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, its dissolution must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the same Act. So, considering the complexity of validity or enforceability of a foreign decree of divorce and the averments of the Courts, it is always recommended to a Hindu couple married in India to seek a divorce from an Indian court only. Hope the query stands clarified.