Get Advice on Live Video Call
Earn $ Cash $ with
consultations on Bissoy App

A judgment was announced on 2<sup>nd</sup> January, 2002 &amp; the decree prepared on 10<sup>th</sup> January, 2002. Application for certified copy made on 5<sup>th</sup> January, 2002 and the copy was ready on 15<sup>th</sup> January, 2002, under section 12 the period to be excluded is

Correct Answer: From 5<sup>th</sup> January, 2002 to 15<sup>th</sup> January, 2002

A judgment was passed on 10th July, 2002, and the decree prepared on 25th July, 2002. An application for certified copy was made on 11th July, 2002 and the certified copy was ready on 1st August, 2002, and delivery of certified copy was taken on 5th August, 2002, under section 12, the period to be excluded is

Consider the 5 × 5 matrix \[{\text{A}} = \left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} 1&2&3&4&5 \\ 5&1&2&3&4 \\ 4&5&1&2&3 \\ 3&4&5&1&2 \\ 2&3&4&5&1 \end{array}} \right

Let A be an m × n matrix and Ban n × m matrix. It is given that determinant ($$I$$m + AB) = determinant ($$I$$n + BA), where $$I$$k is the k × k identity matrix. Using the above property, the determinant of the matrix given below is
\[\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} 2&1&1&1 \\ 1&2&1&1 \\ 1&1&2&1 \\ 1&1&1&2 \end{array}} \right

Eigen values of the matrix \[\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} 0&1&0&0 \\ 1&0&0&0 \\ 0&0&0&{ - 2i} \\ 0&0&{2i}&0 \end{array}} \right

X' executed a sale deed in favour of 'Y' on 1st January, 2002. Subsequently on 10th January, 2002, 'X' executed a sale deed in respect of the same property in favour of 'Z'. Thereafter the sale deed in favour of 'Z' executed on 10th January, 2002 was registered on 20th January, 2002. Whereas the sale deed in favour of 'Y' was registered on 30th January, 2002.
In the said case, by virtue of section 47

X' a Muslim executes a deed of gift on 1st January, 2002 of his property to 'Y', but delivery of possession is not given. Later, on 10th January, 2002 executed another gift deed in favour of 'Z' which was accompanied by delivery of possession to 'Z'. The gift deeds in favour of 'Y' & 'Z' were registered on 30th January, 2002 & 20th January, 2002 respectively.
In these facts,

Which section of the Limitation Act prescribes that in computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal or application, for leave to appeal or for revision or for review of a judgment, the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from or sought to be revised or reviewed shall be excluded:

Which section of the Limitation Act prescribes that in computing the period of limitation any suit, appeal or application, for leave to appeal or for revision or for review of a judgment the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from or sought to be revised reviewed shall be excluded:

A decree was transferred for its execution from Court X to Court Y. Court Y is of the opinion that Court X committed an error when it calculated the limitation period. Court Y announced that it rectified the mistake of Court X and upheld the rule of law by pronouncing judgment in favour of judgment debtor. This was challenged by the decree holder in the appellate court. Predict whether the decree holder will win the case.

Raw material purchased:
1st January, 600 units @ Rs. 12 per unit
12th January, 500 units @ Rs. 14 per unit
21st January, 300 units @ Rs. 13 per unit
Raw material issued for manufacture:
3rd January 300 units
5th January 124 units
15th January 250 units
16th January 300 units
Raw material returned to stores from manufacturing department on 14th January, 50 units. The material is issued on First-in-First out method.
The value of material remaining in store on 21st January will be: