imthiyaz
10 March 2009 at 00:03
Sir, Our muslim partition suit is pending in Final decree proceedings with 11 decree holders as sharers, AS often the case in muslim partiion suits,there are large number of legal heirs of 11 decree holders close to 200,
The preliminary decree is dated year 1960, Final decree proceedings petition is filed in the year 1989 which is still pending and has adjourned for hearing next month,
After the preliminary decree some of the defendants have sold many of the suit properties without knowledge of plaintiffs, now in this pending Final decree proceedings, some how these purchasers has been made parties wrongly even though they are not bonafide purchasers.
Some of the defendants and plaintiffs legal heirs has colluded with each other and have struck as compromise deal with one of the non bonafide purchaser without the consent of court and one of the decree holder daughter who is and LR of plaintiff , and now they are telling to court they have done compromise and this survey number may be removed from decree,
for which one plaintiff daughter has objected as she have already filed any Inter locutary application to strike out LR’s of her brother who are orphaned grand children who were wrongly added as parties while filing final decree petition, As per Mohameddan law orphaned grand children are not entitle for any share ,
when there is a dispute for a share of a plaintiff that to strike out LR’s, Judge wants to go ahead with compromise even though there is an objection to compromise , and also without disposing of this Inter locutary application, According to judge LR’s cannot be strike out in final decree proceedings it is only to follow preliminary decree and personal law cannot applied here,
But these orphaned grandchildren were brought on record when filing for final decree petition as there father predeceased the decree holder after preliminary decree ie in 1976, as the original plaintiff was alive at the time of preliminary decree she died in 1986, hence there is no question of going against preliminary decree, But the judge is arguing that these LR’s cannot be striked out in final decree proceedings,
As per my knowledge it can be done using Order 1 rule 10(2) to strike out LR’s at any stage of proceedings. our advocate has done one mistake by filing an application in only 151 cpc as he was little unsure at the time of filing now he says that is not a problem as only prayer is looked upon in an IA not provision of law, Please help how to proceed as we want to strike out thse LR’s who are not entitle for share, Final decree proceedings is adjourned fornext month.
2 )Judge cannot go ahead for compromise when there is an objection by any one of decree holder, judge cannot force, is it right.
imthiyaz
09 March 2009 at 23:22
Sir, Our muslim partition suit is pending in Final decree proceedings with 11 decree holders as sharers, AS often the case in muslim partiion suits,there are large number of legal heirs of 11 decree holders,
Some of the defendants and plaintiffs ohave colluded with each other without the knowledge and authorisation of some of legal heirs of decree holders and have executed a panchayati fariqhat with notary signature for some of the decree schedule properties and has applied for Khata change to their names on the basis of this paper without the knowledge of honorable court in which final decree proceedings is pending.
These fraud persons are running a case in the Tahsildar court for khata change for which proceedings are adjourned for orders in next hearing, I attended the previous hearing that Tahsildar is arguing even though the case is pending in final decree procedings for the schedule properties for which khata change has been applied, Tahsildar is ready to change the khata, he may be under some influence, I have filed an petition in taluk office and has taken an acknowledgement that khata for these properties must not be changed as still the case is pending.
I spoke to my advocate he says, we cannot take action against tahsildar or revenue authorities till he writes an Order and also we cannot make him party to apply for stay in court,
We want to stay the proceedings in Tahsildar court to dismiss the case till the final decree proceedings is completed, I spoke to Revenue authority, he says Tahsildar has dicriminitary power to change Khata u can cancel it again when the final decree proceedings is completed , But we don’t want to wait till fdp is completed we want to stay the tahsildar court proceedings,
How can it be done…
WILLIAM JOHN BOSE.K
09 March 2009 at 10:44
Can a Forigner be sued by an indian or sue and indian in any indian court
vinod bansal
08 March 2009 at 13:39
Sir
I want to send a legal notice to transport authorities of Haryana for restraining overloading & misuse of tractors in commercial activities that is violation of Motor Vehicle Act,,to whom i have to send copies of notice,plz suggest,,if any model drafting is available than oblige by providing the same..Thanks
H. Mujtaba
07 March 2009 at 22:26
Dear Sirs,
Thank you very much for the reply. May I request you to kindly provide me the case law that an application under Order I Rule 10 read with section 151 of C.P.C., is maintainable to bring on record the legal representatives of the defendants who have died prior to the institution of the suit.
Thanks and warm regards,
Mujtaba
T.V.Ramana Rao
07 March 2009 at 21:36
My friend is working in a private polytechnic. He reports that willfully i.e., the admissions are full, his employer delaying the payment of monthly salaries by 10 to 15 days every month. i.e., he is sending his salaries to bank accounts every month on 15th instead of 1st. Whether his action legally valid? if not whom to approach before approaching the court of law?
allurisivajiraju
07 March 2009 at 20:51
Respected Seniors,
Mr. 'X' Purchased a flat from 'Y' who is a builder of a apartment. Total flat owners are 30. But there are only 17 car parking places available. But Mr 'Y' builder already collected Rs. 25,000-00 from all the 30 members towards car parking area.
While purchasing flats Mr. 'Y'issued a brocher which shows all the specifications to be provided to all flat owners. In the specifications clearly mentioned that all the flat owners are having car parking area.
Recently Mr. 'Y' provided car parking area to the 17 flat owners in the absence of 13 members including Mr. 'X'.
Then the said 13 members questioned Mr. 'Y' about car parking area. Mr. 'Y' replied that i will provide car parking area by constructing a shed in the road side margin which was adjacent to the apartment. But the said proposal was opposed by the 17 members who are already obtained car parking area. In fact it is very difficult to live in the said flat with car arking area.
In the above circumstances what is the remedy to Mr. 'X'. whether he approach civil court for specific performance of contranct or he approch consumer court for obtaining damages for his mental strain.
Thanking you in advance.
Ratnakar Sapkal
07 March 2009 at 19:27
Would a suit filed after a laspe of 12 years from the date of exeuction of agreement of sale be barred by limitation.
Manish Singh
07 March 2009 at 13:22
Dear Members, please throw some light on it.
Can there exist more than one housing society in a same resident area/locality?
If a society is in existence for, say 50 flats, thn can members do away with the first memberhip and form another society.
the matter is under the Societies Registration Act.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Banking Services
Banker failed to send notice to me & broked My locker for non payment of locker rent. whether it amounts deficency of service & I Claim damage charges to banker.