Resolve Issues through Corporate Attorney at Law in Pakistan:
To resolve any legal issue through attorney at law in Pakistan or corporate lawyer in Lahore you may contact Jamila Law Associates. Pratarai Trumbakial Mehta v. Jayant Nemchand Shah is when the Bombay High Court held that when a certified copy of a document. The true copy of the original is executed through attorney at law in Pakistan or corporate lawyer in Lahore.
Signatures and Seal on the Document’s:
A notary has to make its entry in the register and put his signatures and seal on the document’s copy. As far as the executants’ identity is concerned, a notary is bound to take care of it. A reading of section 2(14) clarifies that where a document creates some right or liability between the parties transferring certain rights, it comes within the meaning of an instrument’s definition and is chargeable. A copy of a document is not an “instrument” as envisaged in sub-clause (14) of section 2.4.
The word chargeable used in sub-clause (6) of section 2 connotes instruments chargeable under the Stamp Act only and not under any Act. Section 5 applies only when the device comprises more than one transaction, and it is immaterial for this purpose whether those transactions are of the same category or different categories through attorney at law in Pakistan or corporate lawyer in Lahore. When a person possesses both a personal capacity and a representative capacity such as trustee and a delegating of power by him in both these capacities, the position in law is the same as if a different person joins in executing authority in respect of unrelated matters. There is no community of interest between the personal estate belonging to the executants and the trust estate vested in him.
Corporate Lawyer in Lahore:
They must be distinctly for section 5. In case through attorney at law in Pakistan or corporate lawyer in Lahore no part of the instrument is scribed on the subsequent sheets, it would not comply with the provisions of section 13. The Madras High Court was concerned with the adequacy of stamps affixed in a document authorizing a vakil to do a specific Act in reference from the Board of Revenue under section 46 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. A form authorizing a vakil to apply for copies of records from the Collector’s office is correctly stamped with a Court-fee Stamp under Article 10(a) of ‘Schedule Il of the Court-Fees Act, 1870, does not require to be stamped as a power-of-attorney under Article 50(b) of Schedule 1 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 the Court held. Ganpat v. Prem Singh was a case where a power-of-attorney empowered a person, who is neither an attorney at law in Pakistan or corporate lawyer in neither Lahore of a Court nor a certificated Mukthyar of a Court, to represent another Civil Court.
It is governed not by Article 48 of First Schedule of the Stamp Act, 1899 but by Article 10 of Schedule of the Court-Fees Act, 1870. A Mukthyar, according to the Court, is an attorney, whether appointed specially or generally or certified as a legal practitioner and Mukthyar name is a document, with empowers him to act for the person by or on whose behalf the form is executed and includes a power-of-attorney in favor of a person other than a certified Mukthyar.