Kindly provide any hc or sc judgement for referece, if any.
AMITS
(Querist) 24 October 2014
This query is : Resolved
(A)
4 BROTHERS + 5 SISTERS =9 CHILDREN,THEIR MOTHER DIED IN JAN 1977 AND FATHER IN DECEMBER 1977. AFTER MOTHERS DEATH SHE HAD AN AGRICULTURAL LAND PURCHASEDBY BY HER WITH HER OWN INCOME, MUTATION WAS DONE BY CONCERENED REVENUUE AUTHORITIES IN FAVOUR OF BROTHER, SISTERS GAVE AN AFFIDAVIT THAT THEY HAD NO OBJECTION OVER MUTATION IN FAVOUR OF 4 BROTHERS.IT WAS DONE IN PRESENCE OF FATHER.
unfortunately ,revenue authorities in their note did not mention any thing about noc by sisters in mutation note nor the records are available ( as under rti authrities are not bound to give records beyond 20 years.) they might have beendestroyed , lost,anything could have happend.
(B) LATER LAND WAS ACQUIRED BY STATE GOVT AND COMPENSATION IN LIEU WAS TO BE PAID ,THEN ONE SISTER TURNED HOSTILE AND CLAIMED HER SHARE IN COMPENSATION i.e. 1/9 share, fshe filed case in revenue court in 1994,(pending)
(c) rest of 4 the sisters later in feb.2010 executed a proper registered release deed stating and confirming the stand of the brothers that they gave an affidavit to tehsildars for mutation in favor of 4 brothers and the the 5 sisters also signed the same affidavit in the presence of their father who was alive at that time.
(d) 5th siser who is claiming her share in compensation got stay from high court on whole compensation land which was to be givven in lieu of acquisition.
4 brother are yet to file their reply.
(e) my question is why high court stayed whole land when only 1/9 was claimed, rest of the sisters have already released their rights through registered release deed.high court should have directed to stay only 1/9 part of the compensation which was claimed.
(f) kindly give suitable similar reference most similar or some landmark judgements hc/sc which could prove to be helpful in our next hearing . kindly, also provide your valuble inputs in this case !
Isaac Gabriel
(Expert) 24 October 2014
Plead for vacation of the stay with the factual information.Since the share of the particular sister cannot be denied,you have to oblige as per prevailing law that all children are entitled for share.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate 
(Expert) 24 October 2014
do not resist her 1/9 share of else who would get nothing till years.
Anirudh
(Expert) 24 October 2014
Dear AMITS,
NOC if any given by your sisters in the year 1977 is of no value. If that is valid, then why your four sisters have to give registered relinquishment deed in the year 2010?
Therefore, please note, that in respect of immovable property, it is only the Registered Deeds (in this case Regd. Relinquishment Deed) that have validity.
Admittedly, in your case, one sister has not executed the Regd. Relinquishment Deed. Therefore her share cannot be denied by you. Accept that you are willing to give her her 1/9th share, she will get satisfied, court will record the compromise and dispose of the case.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 24 October 2014
Decisions not provided in this section.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 25 October 2014
Since the high court has stayed the entire proceedings, you are required to give reply, better file your counter for the interim stay and try to vacate it and also file the reply suitably, why do you need a judgment at this early stage, ask your lawyer to find a suitable judgment from the bar library.
