Skip to main content

affidavit for resumption of indian citizenship

 AFFIDAVIT FOR RESUMPTION OF INDIAN CITIZENSHIP


BEFORE THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, _______________


Affidavit of Mr. MJ, aged about __ years S/o MY, R/o ______________________


I, the above name deponent solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:


1. That the deponent has applied before your Honour for the resumption of Indian Citizenship, and hence is fully conversant of the facts deposed below.


2. That the deponent was born in ____________ Hospital on ___________.


3. That the full Name of the father of deponent is MY.


4. That the deponent has ceased to be any Indian Citizen by virtue of sub section (1) of Section 8 of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955, on 1, Jan. 1980 because of reason that the father of deponent Mr. MY has renounced his Indian Citizenship on the said date.


5. That deponent declares his intention to resume Indian Citizenship and applied to the Central Government to register this declaration.


Deponent


VERIFICATION


I, MJ, the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of this affidavit form paras 1 to 5 are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Nothing material has been concealed.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The top 10 things to remember for doing good legal drafting:

The top 10 things to remember for doing good legal drafting: 1. Clarity and Precision: Use clear and precise language to convey the intended meaning accurately. Avoid ambiguity or vagueness in drafting provisions. 2. Structure and Organization: Organize the document logically with headings, subheadings, and numbered lists to enhance readability and comprehension. 3. Consistency: Maintain consistency in terminology, formatting, and style throughout the document to avoid confusion. 4. Compliance with Legal Framework: Ensure that the document complies with relevant laws, regulations, and legal principles applicable to the subject matter. 5. Customization for Specific Needs: Tailor the document to meet the specific needs, preferences, and circumstances of the parties involved. 6. Risk Management: Identify and address potential legal risks, liabilities, and obligations associated with the subject matter of the document. 7. Precision in Drafting: Be precise and meticulous in drafting provisi
Post a Comment
Read more

LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS

  8uShri B. P. Hira Works vs Shri C. M. Pradhan Factual matrix The Court of Appeal dealt with a group of 174 appeals by special leave arising from several application made against B.P. Hira, Works Manager at the Central Railway Workshop and Factory in Parel, Bombay, under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, claiming overtime wages since 1948. The main judgment was delivered by the Payment of Wages Authority, Bombay, in the application filed by C.M. Pradhan, which gave rise to Civil Appeal No. 131 of 1957. The respondent claimed that he was entitled to overtime wages for work on Sundays when he was not given a holiday within three days prior to or three days subsequent to the Sundays on which he worked. The appellant conceded that the respondent had not been given a holiday within the three days prior to or the three days subsequent to the Sundays on which he worked as required by s. 52 of the Indian Factories Act. The respondent alleged that he was a worker within the meaning of s. 2, sub-
Post a Comment
Read more

The Supreme Court of India has delivered several landmark judgments that have significantly shaped the legal landscape of the country

The Supreme Court of India has delivered several landmark judgments that have significantly shaped the legal landscape of the country. Below are some of the most notable ones: 1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) Principle Established: Basic Structure Doctrine Significance: The judgment held that while the Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution, it cannot alter the "basic structure" or essential features of the Constitution. This doctrine serves as a limitation on the amending power of the Parliament. 2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) Principle Established: Expansive Interpretation of Article 21 Significance: The Supreme Court expanded the scope of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) to include various rights such as the right to travel abroad and the right to a fair and reasonable procedure. 3. Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980) Principle Established: Balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles Significan
Post a Comment
Read more