Rajath Chandran
22 August 2009 at 12:12
Dear Seniors, I have a querry on sale of Car parking slots by the flat promoters.
When we purchase an undivided share of land in the transaction of purchasing a flat in an apartment, I presume that we are sold an undivided share of land. Like this, all the owners of the flat should be sold some undivided share of the land on which the apartment is being built.
Logically, if we put together all the undivided share of the land sold, it should tally with the whole of extent of land owned by the flat promoter (subject to certain extent of land statutorily left).
At this stage, now let us assume that I need to have a car parking within the premises. Most of the promoters are selling parking slots to the intending owners at some rates fixed by them.
My doubt here is that when the individal owners have purchased the whole of extent of land (of course each one purchasing some undivided share), how come the promoter sell again a place for consideration.
I understand that the calculation of undivided share includes this area where the car parking is alloted.
If my question is correct, would like the seniors to suggest their reply. If my assumption is wrong, then pleae clarify how the undivided share is being calculated in apartments.
Rajath Chandran
99464 45067
A Truthseeker
22 August 2009 at 09:28
prevention is better than cure. so, are lawyers' role more important than doctors'?a man first quarrels, then ffights, then gets injured, then treated by doctor.
Sarvesh Kumar Sharma Advocate
22 August 2009 at 09:05
frinds,
my client driving his tractor,sudden four person comes and robbery that tractor.
the tractor was full insured.
my clint has no driving licence .
without driving licence can he claim his insured sum?
is there any need of driving licence on the matter of robbery case?
any case law regarding this ....
Member (Account Deleted)
22 August 2009 at 06:08
A partition suit is filed by one brother against other. There are three sisters alive. Date fixed for filing W/S. on that date instead filing WS can the defendant brother file an application under O1 R 10(2) for joining sisters? (All Hindu)
Hetram Bishnoi
22 August 2009 at 00:31
effect of keshavanand bharati case on Indian constitution
PRAKASHCHANDRA MARU
21 August 2009 at 23:10
hello all learned experts
in the accident case i joined the oppsite party vehiclw owner and the insurance comapny by whom accident done with theapplicant (applicant means claimanant of the claim case) but i have not joined the vehicle's owner and insurance compny of the compalainat what effect of it it will the effect the case the reason not join the said claimaint's vehicle is that there was no any negligency on the part of them psl inform thanks in advance
Member (Account Deleted)
21 August 2009 at 22:11
A Complaint has been dismissed by the Magistrate u/s 203 Cr.P.C.
Does a revision lie u/s 398 only? Is a revision u/s 397 not maintainable?
Is it correct that u/s 398 Cr.P.C. Revisional court can only order inquiry and cannot exercise any other Revisional powers?
Is it correct that for exercising powers u/s 397 Cr.P.C. original records have to be mandatorly called for from the lower court? Does not the Revisional court have power to rely upon copies produced by the parties?
Member (Account Deleted)
21 August 2009 at 22:08
S.304A of IPC reads - "Whoever causs the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act....."
Suppose the sentance would have been, "Whoever causes the death of any person by any rash or negliggent act...". Would the meaning differ?
Does the use of the word "doing" in the section has any significance
Is there a difference in meaning of the two sentance mentioned in the query. One with the word "doing" and the other without the word "doing".
According to me both the sentance make sense. If both the sentance are making the same sense, then is not the word "doing" in the first sentance redundant?
According to me though both the sentance make sense, they may not be meaning the same. If that is so what is the difference in the meaning?
Somnath mukherjee
21 August 2009 at 21:24
whether the hearing of mainteneace u/s section 12 can be done without filling the domestic incedent roport. Please give the relevant case laws.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
about case Lonrho Ltd V Shell Petroleum CO. Ltd
Respected Sir/Madam
Could I get the information of the case Lonrho Ltd V Shell Petroleum CO. Ltd -brief facts and principle laid down especially issue related to liability of holding ompany towards subsidiary company in this case or suggest any link related to it.
Thanks & Regards!
Kirti