Subject: Request for Counter Objection.
RSA 160/2011, with the Bangalore High Court: False statement given in Page 1 of their Objections that 20 guntas were detained for their family purpose which is false AS THE SITE LAYOUT ORIGINALLY FORMED were OF 30 PLOTS FROM 1 ACRE AND 20 GUNTAS, MOREOVER PLOTS PURCHASED BY self, (CHANDRAN) IN 1983, WERE NOS. 8 & 9 OF THE TOTAL 30 PLOTS. How could they say in the objections that the 20 guntas were the Plot Nos.8 & 9 and we have no dispute. Please note in the 1st Page of the Objections in the Main Appeal of yours.
Re-Partition Suit:O.S.341/2004 with the Bangalore City Civil Court, Sr.Division, Bangalore Rural. Thamayyanna and Eeranna whom they named also have not come to court or expressed their version. Krishnappa totally left out? amongst the signatories of vendors, from whom I purchased in 1983. May be, he has a heart and is guilty to join the respondents.
Sir, it is IMPORTANT to please note that in the Magdi Land Grab Case of mine. self only made a party since hailing from Chennai, as the rest 28 locals of the 30 plot owners left-out untouched. Self harassed and humiliated since 2004, to knock-off my property. * calls for an interim relief to be paid to Mr.Chandran (Senior Citizen and an ex-serviceman) having been dragged into the case unnecessarily from 2004, incurring valuable time, efforts and money. High time an interim relief be provided to the fragile old aged ex-serviceman CHANDRAN.
IMPORTANTLY it is a hereditary property. Please note: * Late Eeriah has two sons ie. Late Eeranna and Late Kempiah, of whom
Late Eeranna has ONLY one son by name 1.Mr.Krishnappa while
Late Kempiah has five sons i.e. 2.(a) Thamayanna and 3(b). Eeranna the respondents 4(c). Chikkanna, 5(d). Rama and 6(e).Laxmana. These six (6) members numbered above are the legitimate heirs, OF THE HINDU UNDIVIDED FAMILY.
* During the time of original purchase, Chikkanna's where-abouts, were not known but Rama and Laxmana were minors obviously, left-out in the Sale of the 30 plots layout as per HUF Succession Act. Hindu Undivided Family.
IT IS A CLEAR CASE OF land-grabbing, besides SUPPRESSION OF FACTS BY WHICH THE VALUABLE TIME OF THE COURTS BEING WASTED SINCE 2004, interestingly to note that ONLY Mr. CHANDRAN, ALONE, AMONGST THE 30 PLOT OWNERS, IN THE LAYOUT MADE IN 1983. BEING, UN- NECESSARILY DRAGGED INTO THE CASE, HARASSED, HUMILIATED SINCE 2004 UNTO DATE By the appellant. In the partition suit. IF ALMIGHTY DO EXIST MISCREANTS SHOULD ANSWER.
Mr. Chandran purchased from Krishnappa, Thamayanna and Eeranna(* three signatories). BUT the appellant not included Mr.Krishnappa deliberately, not made him a party, though he was a bonafide seller, which itself is a suppression of facts.
The Law and order in the state, have encouraged the intruders(appellant) into my client ‘s (P.K.Chandran)’s site, who had encroached, pulled out the fencing and erected a katcha shed, with FORCEFUL POSSESSION AFTER 21 LONG YEARS OF PURCHASE and collecting revenue, as rent. Despite “Statusquo” announced in the court-hall, the respondents went ahead to obtain Electricity connection, erecting windows when pointed out it is a shed not for human living as there is only one entrance door, to Katcha Shed without window nor any other outlet. I am financially constrained at the moment as my sons have not ventured to sea, owing to the bad situation on the high-seas owing to PIRACY now known to the public as well. Awaiting truth to be established with justice to me, longing from 2004. Lok Ayuktha in Bangalore also addressed for justice. Where else the common man has to bang his head.
Yours very sincerely, P K CHANDRAN ( Ex.serviceman and senior citizen
Encl. )
