nareshgaikawad 24 May 2015

Encroachment

My grand father died in 1987 My father died in 2006 my self 33 years old. My grand father buy a land in 1980. The land is pass on my father after death of my grand father. And now the land is on my name after death of my father in year 2006. Third person build a house on that land in 2005 (in this period my father in hospitalised). He got a permission to build from gram panchayat. He shows sell agreement with my father on 20 rupee stamp paper in year of 1992, shows full payment recipt on 7 rupee stamp paper and bearer cheqe entry on my fathers name in his bank statement. Then please tell me what should i do to remove his house. Have i any right on that land?

Reply Follow

4 Replies

(Guest)

dear-
if you feel those are forged documents, you have all rights intact on the property passed from your dad.file a RTI with registrar office questioning the validity of the document bsaed on the document no and date listed in the document..get a civil suit filed first to get a injuction order for the other party from enjoying the property anymore. these kine of cases might take years..but just dont give up..law will eventually prevail and you will get the possession back..dont give up.

once the case has initiated, am sure the other party will come for a out of court settlemen wtih a compensation or will back off.

nareshgaikawad 25 May 2015

Thanks for reply But they have only unregistered sell agreement on 20 rupee stamp paper, payment receipt on 7 rupee stamp paper and bearer cheques entry on his bank statement

Amit keshri (Mangar) 26 May 2015

i think you must know the genuinety of the sell agrreement, money receipt etc. if you think that all documents are fordged by that person, in that event you can file a civil suit for declaration of your right title and interest and recovery of possession and at the same time u can file a criminal case for fordging and creating false documents against that person.

Ravi Bagewadi (proprietor) 26 May 2015

Our Neighbour X had made 6 partitions in regd. partition deed, and one portion of X ie. X/f is demarked by widdth of 26' towards north and widdth of 14' towards south, the length of property being 21', We Plaintiff Y have property adjacent to X divisions ie. X/a, X/b,X/c.X/d,X/e and X/f.

After X/e service lane is shown of widdth 12' in partition deed,and this is being shown in city survey record. Where as map of X and Y when shown as combined map, does not show the location of service lane, and hence ambuiguity exists as to how much space is left to the share of Y beyond service lane,

We had filed suit for mandatory and permanent injunction, bu it was dismissed even though,

1)X/f had no valid permission for Staircase construction

2) Staircase is shown in the so called fake building plan from inside of the building and is actually constructed from outside of the building by encroaching Property of Y.

3) At backyard of property of X/f and that of Y is property of Z , such that both properties ie. X/f and Y extend from one main lane to the Backyard of Z.

4) Property of Z is shown Extending in the actual property of Y, but the fact is that City survey has not included a wall which exists from 90 yrs, thus dividing the property of y and Z.

5) City survey refused to include Service lane in combined map/ individual map, just it says "raste ge hogide" while drawing our map, although every detail adjoining X/f is shown without showing the end boundary of property of our property " Y ".

6) In regd partition deed of X, it is clearly mention presence of portion of Y to the western side of X/f beyond service lane and also admitted by X/f during cross examination which later on was put in a manner that it was falsely stated,

7) Building permission was also not marked since it was a blue print of a Building permission and then was produced as coloured zerox, in front of Judge who did not give judgement.

8) The Suit was dismissed, for reasons, that Y has failed to prove his hold over the property and his ownership, Inspite of the fact that Y had asked the court to appoint the court commission, which was later not allowed for the reasons that a high court judge was appointed for the X/f. and that Y had already said that 3' x6' is encroached, and hence no need of appointment of court commission, thus helping X/f to hide the real findings of the case .

9) Case was dismissed by considering the Building paln where in constructed portion of Y was shown not extending the service lane and also clarification was given that we have shown only the portion of land in which construction is to be made. Which is completely wrong since the

Suit property location should be taken,considering the actual map at the location in which i exists, X/f has confused the court by adding figures like Suffix 1 just as X/1a, X/1f etc, Just bluffing the court that X/1f was previously X/1a and shifting the Suit property location from its actual position to a different location where it has no such position.

The Judge has never paid any heed to the changes suggested by X/f lawyer like whether

X/1a really exists, and whether the suit property lies to the north or towards south, Suite property actually lied to south of property of Y and to the western side of X/f,but while arguement , Lawyer of X/f very well confused the Judge that Property of Y does not bend and enter the property of X at northern direction of Y keeping aside the real fact that when the Suit was filed that Y tapers and enters X at X/f location at the southern direction .

HOW can such GRAVE mistake be agreed while giving judgement?

How can the Judgement be given without actually MEASURING the property of both X and Y,

PL> SEE THE HEIGHT OF JUDGEMENT GIVEN TRIAL COURT JUDGE " Since Y can't prove his ownership , the SUIT PROPERTY BELONGS TO X/f,

I DOUBT regarding the capability of JUDGEMENT givers,Because,

a)NOT ALLOWING Y to appoint COURT COMMISSION to bring out the real facts,

b)X/f has also not proved thet he has not encraoched, bu has vaguely said he has not encroached even an inch of y's property .

CASE WAS DISMISSED WITH COSTS<

Y has gone to court for appeal.X/f has approached POLICE STATION WIH JUDGEMENT IN HIS FAVOR and inspite of completing his construction illegally by constructing Second floor on load bearing construction before getting the judgement , has filed complaint on Y that Y should not harass X/f in doing so. and when Y told police authorities that x/f has already completed his construction, and nothing left to be constructed, he was asked to give a written statement of not harassing X/f.In the mean time X/f has managed to Put POLES lastweek and deny access for Y by taking undue advantage of written statement given by Y in police station..

THERE BY X/f MAKING HIS PLOT area from 26' widdth towards north to 52' towards north, by again encroaching upon Y area fully , Y had filed the SUIT against X/f for encroached portion of 3x6 to be removed , BUT VERY VERY GOOD DECISION by trial court Judge has made it possible for X/f "THE MAN WITHOUT OWNERSHIP OVER THE SUIT PROPERTY TO BE A OWNER OF SUIT PROPERTY".

Meanwhile request of Y for filing a complaint that Y has gone for appeal to the higher court and that construction of poles should be stopped has gone unheeded with X/f havn fake victory over the case, Also Miscellaneous receipt for the complaint was denied.

SUCH is FATE of THE CASE of INDIAN JUDICIARY.

Attached File :

downloaded: 137 times