Anonymous
16 September 2011 at 22:08
The premises owned by me was ordered for eviction based on bonafide necessity of my son in 1983,by add district judge in 2002. Tenant filed appealed in 2002.The case came for hearing now. May I beseige your added knowledge about some latest rulings for eviction of premises based on bonafide need at the time of filing the case,with no consideration for subsequent events. 2.tenant in this case died.The wife of tenant also died. Three sons as L.R.'S are fighting the case. one of them have own bungalow,son of other is having bungalow,third one not residing at jaipur. Will this not suffice no hardship to tenant.
Anonymous
10 January 2011 at 11:58
CASE IS PENDING SINCE 1994.THERE IS NO DISPOSAL TILL TODATE. ACCUSED IS 76 YEARS OLD AND CAN PLEADS GUILTY FOR SUPERVISORY NEGLIGENCE ONLY.SHOULD HE GO FOR PLEA BARGAIN. PROS AND CONS OF PLEA BARGAIN MAY BE APPRISED.
ashish khurana
01 October 2010 at 23:24
1. can a MBBS doctor who had NOT done any post graduation in orthopedics, conduct orthopedic surgeries in a government hospital in Delhi legally without supervision.
2. can a MBBS doctor who has not done any post graduation in orthopedics but is senior, instruct a doctor who is post graduate in orthopedics, regarding the orthopedic management of a patient. If yes, then is that instruction binding.
Daksh
17 September 2010 at 09:27
Dear All,
We all know for sure that in open court Mr.Bhushan while arguing the case has submitted a list of Retired Chief Justice of Apex Court and dared the court to open the envelope.
I want to seek your considered views/opinion that is it appropriate for any officer of the court (be it a Senior Advocate or Ex Law Minister)to conduct himself in a more dignified way. It is evident that two wrongs cannot make a thing right still by playing for the gallary what lesson it will convey for the younger aspiring lot of professionals.
(Believe it I am not commenting on the merits of the case but my concern is solely how the Bench and Bar conducts itself for the betterment of this profession).
Thanking You and best regards
D
A
K
S
H
Anonymous
10 September 2010 at 10:11
please explain clearly what is MESNEprofit in reference to properties matter
Anonymous
08 September 2010 at 23:51
Is it necessary to get completion certificate (for flats, apartments, houses, ...) in Gurgaon?
Read following article on Times of India.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/New-tax-may-make-Gurgaon-flats-costlier/articleshow/6515912.cms
What is surprising for me is the following part:-
"....He added that so far, not a single developer has applied for completion certificate in Gurgaon, where maximum private development has taken place in the state, and that maintenance of infrastructure facilities is still being carried out by them....."
Comments please.
Anonymous
05 September 2010 at 15:07
1 APARTMENTS WAS SOLD BY BUILDER- VENDORS. 2.THE POSSESSION WAS TAKEN BY OWNERS.REGISTRY GOT DONE BY MORE THAN 70%OWNERS.3. MEANWHILE BUILDER-VENDORS ,ALSO PARTNERS IN OTHER PROJECTS FORMED A COMPANY FOR MAINTANANCE(WITHOUT LEGALISED CONSENT OF MAJORITY OF FLAT OWNERS). BUILDER VENDORS TOOK RS.ONE LAKH AS MAINTANANCE DEPOSIT AND RUPEES ONE LAKH AS CLUB FEE. 4.TILL TODATE BUILDING COMPLETION CERTIFICATE NOT OBTAINED FROM JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. 5.SEVERAL WORKS ARE PENDING,TOBE DONE AS PER APPROVED FINAL PLAN OF BUILDING .6.BUILDERS ARE ALMOST KEEPING THEMSELVES AWAY FROM THE RESPONSIBILITY OF WORKS LEFT AS PER APPROVED PLAN,ALSO AS PER COMMITTMENT IN BROCHURE,ALSO AS PER HIGHLIHTS GIVEN ON WEBSITE.7. VENDOR AS CHAIRMAN OF 'CAUCUS' MADE COMPANY IS COLLECTING MAINTANACE MONEY,AND CLUB MONEY FROM EACH FLAT OWNER,SAY RS 3000/PER MONTH FOR A FLAT OF 2120 SQ.FT..8. TILL DATE,THERE IS NO MAINTANANCE CONTRACT WITH FLAT OWNERS.9. NO INFORMATION PROSPECTUS TO FLAT OWNERS. 10.WHEREABOUTS OF RS.200 LAKHS OF MAINTANCE DEPOSIT AND CLUB MONEY TAKEN PRIOR TO REGISTRY IS NOT KNOWN .PERHAPS THEY ARE USING IN THEIR ANOTHER PROJECTS. FLAT OWNERS ARE APPREHENSIVE OF FUTURE CHAOS. PLEASE GUIDE HOW TO PROCEED.
BRAJENDRA SINGH
03 September 2010 at 10:20
Recently Hon'ble Supreme court of India has directed that builders can sell only parking in the basement of their apartments. but they cannot sell open parking . it was in news just two days back....
I would be thankful in case copy of the judgement is sent to me at the earliest, it is judgement that can be useful to all common buyers buying flats in apartments.
DR.BRAJENDRA SINGH
Anonymous
25 August 2010 at 23:45
WE ARE IN A APARTMENT IN MULTISTOREYED BLDG,CONSTRUCTED BY BUILDER AND VENDOR TOGETHER. WITHOUT LOCAL AUTHORITY CERTIFICATION FOR COMPLETION,BUILDING WAS HANDED OVER TO A COMPANY FORMED BY VENDOR(ALSO RESIDENT) AND SOME RESIDENTS. UILDER-VENDOR DUO CHARGED RUPEES ONE LAKH EACH FOR MAINTANANCE DEPOSIRT AND HEALTH CLUB MEMBERSHIP.THUS FOR 100FLATS BUILDING RUPEES TWO CRORES ARE LYING WITH THIS DUO,WITH NO INFORMATION ABOUT ITS USE IN BUSINESS OR BANK DEPOSIT. SINCE BLDG WITH SEVERAL DEFICIENCIES IN STRUCTURE IS HANDED OVER TO THIS COMPANY CHAIRED BY VENDOR . MOST OF LIVERS FEEL THAT MAINTANANCE BY COMPANY IS MORE EXPENSIVE AND CUMBERSOME IN APPROACH FOR DAY TO DAY REDRESSAL THAN SOCIETY,THERE IS SIMMERING DISCONTENT. KINDLY GUIDE HOW TO GET IT RECTIFIED.COMPANY IS NOT KEEN FOR MAINTANACE CONTRACT,NOT READY TO PROVIDE SEVERAL BASICS NEEDED FOR ASSURED LIVING IN FLATS. YOUR GUIDANCE SOLICITED
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Eviction of tenant-bonafide necessity
The premises owned by me was ordered for eviction based on bonafide necessity of my son in 1983,by add district judge in 2002. Tenant filed appeal in 2002.The case came for hearing now. May I beseige your added knowledge about some latest rulings for eviction of premises based on bonafide need at the time of filing the case,with no consideration for subsequent events. 2.Tenant in this case died.The wife of tenant also died. Three sons as L.R.'S are contesting the case. One of them have own bungalow,son of other one is having bungalow,third one is not residing at jaipur. Will this not suffice for no hardship to tenant.