arun kumar
20 December 2013 at 13:00
Hello Experts,
I need your valuable guidance in my below mentioned eventwise query.
1) I had purchased a hut in year 1986 in slum area of mumbai and was iiving there with my wife.
2) In year 1993 my younger brother came from native and started staying with me.
3) After my fathers death I called my mother to mumbai as she was alone in native.
4) My brothers wife also came with my mother so it become impossible for me to accommodate 7 people in that tiny hut and I was also very ill that time.
5) Being a Municipal employee I was aware that sooner or later the slum will go into SRA scheme.
6) I allowed my brother to stay in the same hut and I took a home loan and purchased a flat outside mumbai
7) As stated the hut is being redeloped under SRA scheme and authorities made me eligible in Annexure 2 and agreement also done on my name.
Things were going well but recently my mother passed away and my brother started showing his true colour he in behest of some society members putting pressure on me to give half share in the SRA flat otherwise he will sue me. I have already gave him Rs. 200000/- vide cheques during demolition of hut to find a alternate home which he did but he is become greedy.
Sir, I have all the proofs prior to 1995 and ration card till date so is there any possibility that he can litigate this matter.
I have two married son and one is staying on rent I have not sold the hut thinking their future in mind but my brother has become a source of nuisance for me. Please suggest that he has any rights.
Mridul
08 December 2013 at 16:40
Hi sir/mam,
I have been in continued service with an organisation since 9th april 2009 and last day with company was 29 october 2013, am i eligible for gratuity withdrawal.
DOJ:09/04/2009.
DOR:29/10/2013.
Thanking you in advance.
Mridul Boruah
shree sharma
26 August 2013 at 12:18
if a hindu dies before 2004 leaving ancestral property of his grandfather and property was not divided till ammendment of 2005
the property is now to be divided among 4 daughters and 1 son land is 130 acre in MP.
father died in 1967.mother died in 2010
alive heirs are 4 daughters and 1 son.
land is ancestral.no division took place before today among heirs .all heirs have their name on revenue records.
son born in 1940.
daughters born in 1955 1958 1959 1961.
(a) by birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son; (b) have the same rights in the coparcenary property as she would have had if she had been a son; (c) be subject to the same liabilities in respect of the said coparcenary property as that of a son, and any reference to a Hindu Mitakshara coparcener shall be deemed to include a reference to a daughter of a coparcener: Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall affect or invalidate any disposition or alienation including any partition or testamentary disposition of property which had taken place before the 20th day of December, 2004.
what does it mean.
though heirs born before act but partion is to be made now?
plz help
Sophiya Khan
06 February 2012 at 18:56
A Muslim girl got converted herself in Hindu Religion but never made any changes in regard of her name and get married to a Hindu boy after there marriage a baby girl was born from the said wedlock but at the same time she got separated from her husband and after a period of time she had come to know that some criminal matters are also pending against him.After her divorce she again convert back to her earlier religion and got married to a Muslim boy.Now the question is, the minor girl since birth used to live with her mother and now her father trying to take the custody but the Mother is not at all ready?How can the mother stop the custody of her child?
K.K.Ganguly
06 February 2012 at 18:18
Would the Ld. Experts kindly advise on the following?
Husband filed Mat Suit u/s 13)(i)(ia) of Hindu Marriage Act when the marriage was solemnised u/s 16 of Act XLIII of 1954.
Wife does not want to give Divorce.
Is the above Mat Suit liable to be rejected as per Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC since the marriage was not solemnised as per Hindu Marriage Act?
Advocate Rajiv Mishra
11 November 2011 at 16:59
Sr,
Muneem transferred some amount with master's blanked signed cheque in his account .After fir he surrenderred in court, bail rejected by sesssions court. the account was holded by the bank in pressure of the master.High court ordered to deposit the Bankdraft of amount transferred in the name of master in session court as a precondition of bail.Accused in jail from March 2011.Bankdraft cannot be made due to holding of such account by the bank. The lowercourt denied to instruct the bankto make the bankdraft while masters account is in the same branch.What to do in such conditions?
TIRTHA MONDAL
11 November 2011 at 00:02
In my deed,the quantity of my purchased land depicted as "25.6 decimal or 11,319sq.ft or 0.0259 of-on-acres".All the data are correct,but the data "0.0259 of-on-acres" is wrongly depicted where it would be "0.259 of-on-acres".(It may be relevant that the areas of land map in my deed is correct and when,in 2010,I gave revenue for this purchased land,the Revenue officer took revenue & gave cash memo against 0.259 acre).Now,The new District Sub-Registrar(the previous D.S.R,who signed in my deed, was transfered) is not willing to rectify this clerical mistake and says that there is no rules to rectify the recorded data of land quantity/Plot no.After that he said that as my purchased land was recorded as 0.0259 acre,for registering 0.259 acres excluding 0.0259 acre,I have to give again the Land Registration Stump duty about 50,000 although I had given the full and complete stump-duty of 70,200/ and the total cost of land registration was 1 lakh and 5 thousand rupees against the land valuation of 10,85,000/ according to the West Bengal Registration Rules 1961. Today I have met with the vendor and he agreed to give his consent in writing in front of court/D.S.R that he sold me 25.6 decimal=to 0.259 acre=to 11319 sq.ft land.Today I have also met one local civil lawyer who wants to go through AFIDAVIT or DEED OF DECLARATION or PRE-LITIGATION process.But the BLOCK LAND & LAND REFORM OFFICER(B.L & L.R.O) told me that he may accept land quantity data for Mutation and "Parcha" purpose, only in acre which must be depicted in deed and no other document,i.e AFIDAVIT/DEED OF DECLARATION/PRE-LITIGATION will be entertain.As I am a retired person and got extension to stay in company quarter for 6 months,I am not willing to go any civil suit as I have to complete my home-building upon this land within this limited time.Please let me know What should I do & in what judicial process I shall get remedy in shorter time and able to save the re-registration stump-duty fees about ,more or less, 50,000/ as I have already given the total amount according to that W.B Registration Rules 1961.
mahendrakumar
17 October 2011 at 07:04
while submitting written argument notes in consumer courts,is it manadatory that the copy of the full judgements of other state forum/national forum,quoted in the argument notes to justify our case is to be submitted?
or a mere mentioning of the case no.with the parties name along with the brief of the case quoted in the argument not is enough?
vinodullattil
16 October 2011 at 22:29
What is the difference between tenancy in common and joint tenants
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Status as workman
An employee was a junior officer in a company having six grades for officers. Obviously he had no administrative or managerial powers and worked as instructed by superiors. His appointment letter was silent about his department and job responsibilities.
Upon a dispute for promotion, the superiors took away his work and he was kept idle without assignment till he was dismissed after four years of mistreatment by superiors.
In the Labour court, the company misrepresented fabricated fake job responsibilities to prevent justice to the employee. The Labour court did not go in details for sake of justice but ruled against the employee stating not a 'workman'. The Labour Court neglected the fact that the employee was never given job responsibilities and after the dispute, he was without any work assignment.
When the employee was without any work till he was dismissed, what is his status as a workman under the legal definition?
Best regards,
Navin Pandya