Krishnan Venkatachalam
16 years ago
"X" an individual availed housing loan from a nationalised bank and the house property was Mortgaged to the bank till the repayment of loan."X" defaulted in payments and the bank issued notice to the borrower that it will auction the property. In the meanwhile "X" housing property along with some other properties were attached by the Income tax department. The bank which had given loan to "X" auctioned the property after giving due intimation to the IT department and issuing public notice for auction.
The question is whether Income tax department will have priority over the bank ( secured creditor ) in taking the sale proceeds of the auctioned property. The bankers claim that they have preference over the IT department quoting SARFESI Act. However some of my collegues say that the borrower is an individual and hence bank can not claim priority over IT department quoting SARFESI act which will be only applicable to borrowers who are company incorporated under companies Act.
Kindly clarify as to who will get priority over the sale proceeds of auction whether bank or IT Department.
V V SATYANARAYANA
16 years ago
Sirs,
I am a principal employer and all the employees working in our firm are drawing more than Rs. 10,000/- as wages. As such we are not covered under E.S.I. Act.
Kindly clarify to what extent I am responsible for:
a) Payment of ESI by the Contractors working under me in respect of their employees.
b) Returns to be submitted by the Contractors under ESI Act.
Thanking you.
akash jain
16 years ago
I have purchased a residential property near about 30 yrs back.We got the sale deed Registered through the power of attorney holder of the seller.
The property is muted by us in Muncipal records from then and we are staying there peacefully till now and paying all dues etc in our name as owner.
Recently the owner,3 years back ,after knowing that we lost the copy of power of attorney of seller,refused the registry and given ground that he left the place at the of Registry,and he never sold the property to us.
The registered deed of sale contains Income Tax permission under Section 230A[1],of I.T .Act 1961,which was signed by the original parties and is attached in the Registry.The I.T. permission was from the other State,where the seller was filling Income Tax returns and having their Head Office.
Now,can I call the Income Tax Dept of that State from where the order was issued to Seller,for witness in Civil Court,where I filled Title deed suit against the Seller.The said Order or Permission Order U/S 230A[1] of I.T Act,1961 ,was taken before 30 yrs by the seller.
-what is the process to call them?
-IS Civil Court of one State is having Rights to Call for witness from some another state of India,Or we have to go there,to that State,with my Lawyer,Oath Commissioner,appointed by Court for taking the statement Income Tax Dept of that State?
-Can I will get reply from that Dept. ,after 30 yrs about its verification of that order?
-Can I take use of Right to Information Act,and get some useful reply from that Dept. and avoid going their,so long and incurring so much expenses?
-If I can take use of Right to Information Act,what I must ask to them and for expenses ,what and in which Form I have to send money for getting information from I.T Dept.?
_ I.T Dept may refuse to give reply,as the document and information needed by me is of more than 30 yrs old,so what may be appropriate way to ask them ,so as to get reply required for purpose?
What else help and valuable opinion of yours can be received to me in such a matter?
What was the clauses of Section 230A[1],of I.T .Act 1961 and what was the process in Year 1978 to get the Permission under that section of I.T Act,1961?
Please help me and oblidged.
Thanking You sirs,
Akash Maheshwari
akash jain
16 years ago
Sir,
please let me know,what is time limitation to file or challenge in civil court or file a criminal case ,if a person find or came to his knowledge that his property is sold without his knowledge and property is resold to third party?
we want to know,because we purchased property 30 years back, and are paying all dues etc in muncipal dept and electricity dept as owner of property ,since from its purchase i.e from last 30 years and are staying there only from that time.It is a residential property.We sold a part of the same property atleast 10 year back and is in knowledge of our original seller.
But know he is refusing the original registry in the civil court ,where we filed title deed case against them.
Please let me know the limitation period to challenge any Registered document ?
can anyone can challenge anytime,even after 30 Yrs of sale Registered Agreement and resale to third party 10 years back?
please suggest your valuable opinion and obliged.
akash maheshwari
Mohamed Ali
16 years ago
Dear all
our partition suit is decreed in 1960 in name of 10 decree holders,The suit is still pending in final decree proceedings, It has revenue lands in many survey numbers all types of lands like wet lands dry lands etc.
Meanwhile around 4 acres land in two survey numbers has been given on Bhogim(lease) to one farmer by one of the decree holder with out knowledge of other 9 decree holders during pendency of suit, this land has went into tennancy as per tennancy act of 1974, But the tennant who was ploughing the land died and he has no heirs, now his brothers children claiming to be tennants and also has filed an objection in pending final decree proceedings that they are the tennants and also they have thru some wrong means have made some papers to show as tennants.
My questions
1)whether land can go in tenancy even though that land is a part of pending civil proceedings which is decreed in year 1960. whether tenancy holds good if suit is pending for that land and it has been given on lease only by one of the decree holder with out knowledge of other decree holders during pendency of suit.
2) if the original tennant dies with no heirs, than that land will be of orginal land owners who were there prior tenancy.
Ria
16 years ago
Respected Experts,
Mine is a divorce case and Iam the petitioner (party in person). The court had granted me Interim Maintenace in 2004.
My husband paid the Interim Maintenance for 4 years and later in since 2008 till date he did not pay me the Interim Maintenance. I filed a Recovery petition in the court for the same, so my husbands lawyer has now in 2009 after one year pleaded that the had Interim Maintenance be Set aside as my husband has retired from his company and therefore has no income.
Therefore:
1) Can I claim my arrears of maintenance to be paid from the Provident Fund of my husband which he recived on retirement ?
2)Would the court be justified in setting aside the Interim Maintenance when I do not have any other source of income ?
Please advice.
Suresh C Mishra
16 years ago
i have been alloted a plot by a housing society and i have paid full amount to the society but that plot was given to some one else and also sale deed executed in his favor and now one of the responsible member has died and no body is caring in that society to return my money or giving me plot ? what i can do ? pl advise me procedure and action to be taken agianst that co - operative housing soceity /
akash jain
16 years ago
we got our two land property,which we purchased from common seller.We did mutation or got B 1 from Land Revenue Dept. in name of 5 joint owners ,let say A,B,C,D,and E i.e purchaser of both the properties in year March 2005 , and for cancelling both the mutation orders ,Sellers appelled to Upper Appealent Dept. ,by making party in first case B,C,D,E and F ( note-,mutation order was not in name of F,it was in name of A instead of F),and in second case made party to A,B,C,D,F( note- not made party to E,instead,made party to F) and got Ex-party order,by making setting with the Dept. and got a SINGLE ORDER mentioning details of both the cases and order in name of B,C,D,E, and F ,i.e not in name of A.in Nov.2005.
So,in the Cancellation order,that a Single Order for 2 cases,and where,they
------------------------
made parties also different i.e a party was not same in the two appeals filed by them ,but Order was one and in name of B,C,D,E and,F.
We want to know,is that -
1]IS Order is binding on A ,as on his name ,there is no order issued,nor he was made party in Appeal case no.1?,
2]Is Said cancellation order is binding on E,as he was not made party in second appeal case ,but a common Cancellation Order for two cases was against him?
3]can there be a single order for two appeals,where party were not the exact same,because in one appeal party made was b,C,D,E and F and in second appeal ,party was made to A,B,C,D and F ?
4]Can they can make the changes now in order they got,as it is more than 3 years lapsed,and we filed the appeal case to Appealent Authority,imediate,after coming to our knowledge,i.e in Dec.2005.The case is still pending?
5]Is Cancellation order is Right, and is binding on all,as according to me,order cannot be partly wrong or Partly right,it can be right fully or not valid totally.?
6]What course of action can be taken by us to get quick remedy,can Right to information Act can help us ?
please help me and oblidge.
Thanking You Sirs,
Akash maheshwari
ibrahatim@gmail.com
16 years ago
Hi everyone
i have done inter CA, I want to pursue LLB can anyone help me out with the procedure how and from where can i get the detail procedure how i can start. I want to do part time course.
Thanks in advance
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Priority over secured creditors
"X" an individual availed housing loan from a nationalised bank and the house property was Mortgaged to the bank till the repayment of loan."X" defaulted in payments and the bank issued notice to the borrower that it will auction the property. In the meanwhile "X" housing property along with some other properties were attached by the Income tax department. The bank which had given loan to "X" auctioned the property after giving due intimation to the IT department and issuing public notice for auction.
The question is whether Income tax department will have priority over the bank ( secured creditor ) in taking the sale proceeds of the auctioned property. The bankers claim that they have preference over the IT department quoting SARFESI Act. However some of my collegues say that the borrower is an individual and hence bank can not claim priority over IT department quoting SARFESI act which will be only applicable to borrowers who are company incorporated under companies Act.
Kindly clarify as to who will get priority over the sale proceeds of auction whether bank or IT Department.