Anonymous
22 October 2010 at 21:20
Sir, Please highlight. Can he play role in implementation of EP order.
Anonymous
22 October 2010 at 21:15
Sir, Please throw some light on his role & how much time it takes in his action..How to approach for his role in Ex.Petition..
M.A.BHARATHI
22 October 2010 at 21:08
1,My clint living in a properity since 1932,
2,Though the tittle is not in his name, He pays municipal tax for that asset in his name since 1932 till date.
3,Entries in municipality Town survey land register (TSLR) is not in his name.
4,He gets loan by pludging the said properity in cooperative soceity that was registerd in register office.
5,He is having water connection & electricity connection in his name.
Now tittle owner files a case against my clint for the said properity.
Can i win the case?
Anonymous
22 October 2010 at 13:10
The High Court has given the Judgement
against the CAT order which has been filed by the respondent
"Thus, we dispose of the petition setting aside the impugned order dated xxxx and we restore O.A.No.xxxxx with a direction to the Tribunal that the issue of limitation should be decided by the Tribunal.
We make it clear that if the Tribunal decides on the plea of limitation
against the petitioner, issue on merits need not be decided by the Tribunal for
the reason the same has been decided by the Tribunal vide impugned order dated
xxxxx. But in said eventuality while challenging the said order passed by
the Tribunal, the petitioner would be entitled to challenge the impugned order
dated xxxx as well
CM for stay is dismiised as infructuous"
Kindly inform:
1 Whether the order passed by the CAT is set aside?
2 Whether the order is still maintainable as the stay has not been granted to the respondent, If not then why the stay application is dismissed as infructuous ?
Anonymous
22 October 2010 at 12:09
DEAR SIR,
MY MOTHER WHO DIED IN 1989 BEQUESTED HER HOUSE IN DELHI IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER THROUGH A WILL DT APRIL 1989
GF OF HOUSE TO ELDER BROTHER
FF TO YOUNGER BROTHER
SF ON WHICH NOTHING WAS CONSTRUCTED TO ME.
I REPEATED THE SECOND FLOOR WAS JUST A FLOOR AND NOTHING CONSTRUCTED ON IT TILL HER DEATH.
THE WILL WAS PROBATED BY DELHI HIGH COURT IN 1995 AND I AM THE EXECUTOR OF THE WILL AS ALSO THE SECOND FLOOR OWNER.
THE MCD SINCE 1989 AFTER THE DEATH OF MOTHER CORRESPONDED WITH ME ALONE ON ALL MATTERS RELATED TO ARREARS OF TAX ETC FOR THE ENTIRE HOUSE. THERE ARE SEVERAL LETTERS IN THIS REGARD WITH ME.
THUS FROM 1989 TILL MARCH 1999 THE FLOOR REMAINED AS ONLY A FLOOR WITH NO TRESSPASS.I LIVE IN LUCKNOW AND THE HOUSE IS IN DELHI.
IN JUNE 1989 ON A VISIT THERE I LEARN THAT MY YOUNGER BROTHER WHO LIVES AND OWNS THE FF HAD CONSTRUCTED A ROOM AND A TOILET ON MY SECOND FLOOR.
I TOOK UP THE MATTER WITH THE MCD IMMEDIATELY AND ON AC OF MY REPORTING TOOK CONGNISANCE OF THE CONSTRUCTTION FROM APRIL 1,1999 AND IMPOSED A TAX ON UNAUUTHORISED CONSTRUCTION.
MY DOZENS OF LETTERS FOR DEMOLITION MET WITH NO RESPONSE . SUBSEQUENTLY I FILED AN RTI AGAINST MCD AND THE INFRMATION PASSED SEVERE STRICTURES AGAINST MCD STATING THAT IT A CORRUPT DEPT WHJICH DOES NOT ACT.
I ASKED ORALLY MY YOUNGER BROTHER IN JUNE 1999 ITSELF TO DEMOLTISH IT AND HAND POSSESSION.
I FOLLOWED UP THE MATTER ON PAPER VIDE REGD LETTER DT APRIL 2,2000 ASKING HIM TO HAND OVER PEACEFUL POSSESSION.
SUBSEQUENTLY HE ADDED THREE ROOMS AND IS RUNNING A SUCCESSFUL GUEST HOUSE ILLEGALLY.
FROM MAY 2000 I TRIED TO RAISE CONSTRUCTION ON SECOND FLOOR BUT HE OBSTRUCTED ME.
THIS FACT IS RECORDED IN HIGH COURT ORDER DT MARCH 28,2007 IN ANOTHER CASE FILED BY ELDER BROTHER FOR GETTING MUTATION DONE .
IN SHORT MY ATTEMPS TO GET PHYSICAL POSSESSSION AND DEMOLITION OF CONSTRTUCTION AND TO DELHI POLICE FOR SEALING OF ILLEGAL GUEST HOUSE ARE ALL RECORDED.
I HAVE FILED A SUIT FOR POSSESSION IN SEPTEMBER 2010 AGAINST YOUNGER BROTHER AND ALSO MADE DEDEHI POLICE AND MCD PARTIES.
IN RESPONSE TO THE SUIT THE DEFENDENT, YOUNGER BROTHER HAS STATED THAT SUIT IS TIME BARRED AND HE IS OWNER BECAUSE OF ADVERSE POSSESSION.
INCIDENTALLY THE YOUNGER BROTHER WROTE TO ME IN 2003 THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SETTLE THE PROPERTY DISPUTE AND COME TO LUCKNOW.
AS SUCH THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT HE RECOGNISES THE DISPUTE ON PAPER AT LEAST TILL APRIL 2003.
MY QUERY
WHERE DOES THE MATTER STAND IN REGARD TO LIMITATION AND ADVERSE POSESSION
BESIDES THIS HE DOES NOT HAVE A SINGLE ARGUEMENT, I REPEAT THAT THIS IS THE ONLY DEFENSE HE HAS MUSTERED AND NO ANNEXURES AT ALL. IN CONTRAST I HAVE PRODUCE OVER 40 WRITTEN EVIDENCES ABOUT UNAUTHORISE CONSTRUCTION, RUNNING ILLEGAL GUEST HOUSE AND BEING IN POSSESION OF THE SECOND FLOOR.
REGARDS
VINAY KALA
OCTOBER 22,2010
Anonymous
22 October 2010 at 11:14
Dear Sirs,Please Guide... Am 76 yrs Sr.Ctz.
Order.. In the Court of Pri.Civil Judge(Sr Div).after FDP,
Orders on Application U/s 151 CPC(main Pet).Heard..
It is stated by the DH (Decree Holder. Applicant)that JD (Jnt Decree Holder-The violators) is causing obstruction to lay the drainage pipe line thru' CTS 331/A.
On perusal of records, it reveals that DH has produced an order in FDP on... The DH had filed WP stating that no right dexclared with relief to existing well.
Subsequently in WP 6964/06 parties entered into compromise stating that Respondent no.1 is entitled to close the well(a part lying in his land)
Final decree has been passed by this court & map/sheet considered as part of the decree. Both the parties have taken the possession of the property as per final decree but according to JD, HD has no right to lay the drainage pipe line.
But sketch appended(Scanned map enclosed/attached)to the final decree very clear that there is drainage in CTS 331/A,
The entire decree passed by this court is not modified by the Hon.HC WP 6964/06. Such being the case, JD cannot obstruct the DH to lay the drainage pipe from the western side of the property CTS 331/A,
Hence JD hereby directed not to cause any obstruction to the DH to lay the drainage line from western side of the property in CTS 331/A.
Further it is directed to DH also not to cause any damage to the property of JD(now after this order JD has constructed & blocked the passage which was open, purposely)during the progress of laying drainage line.
Accordingly,the petition is disposed of.
This is the order.. With the help of this we approached the police when he shown non compliance & threats to life from JD's attitude & sought protection to lay the line.Under police protection line was laid. Jd went to HC with WP which was dismissed. He removed laid line.We approached police they have registered case with sec.427,504,506 r/w 34 of IPC.
Now he has constructed unauthorized door locked to block the way/passage which was for UGD.
Accordingly we approached all authorities like City Engr,Commissioner of Corporation,law officer on direction of The DC,he came inspected & asked to stop work but un-deterred he put slab.& door. Now commissioner also is not taking any action. We have taken photos & filed for injunction. what else do I do? At this age I,my family,sons & grand sons, am being threatened with life. He has bribed all.so we approached The DC.
PLs inform on deltasudhir@yahoo.com
Anonymous
22 October 2010 at 11:13
Dear Sirs,Please Guide... Am 76 yrs Sr.Ctz.
Order.. In the Court of Pri.Civil Judge(Sr Div).after FDP,
Orders on Application U/s 151 CPC(main Pet).Heard..
It is stated by the DH (Decree Holder. Applicant)that JD (Jnt Decree Holder-The violators) is causing obstruction to lay the drainage pipe line thru' CTS 331/A.
On perusal of records, it reveals that DH has produced an order in FDP on... The DH had filed WP stating that no right dexclared with relief to existing well.
Subsequently in WP 6964/06 parties entered into compromise stating that Respondent no.1 is entitled to close the well(a part lying in his land)
Final decree has been passed by this court & map/sheet considered as part of the decree. Both the parties have taken the possession of the property as per final decree but according to JD, HD has no right to lay the drainage pipe line.
But sketch appended(Scanned map enclosed/attached)to the final decree very clear that there is drainage in CTS 331/A,
The entire decree passed by this court is not modified by the Hon.HC WP 6964/06. Such being the case, JD cannot obstruct the DH to lay the drainage pipe from the western side of the property CTS 331/A,
Hence JD hereby directed not to cause any obstruction to the DH to lay the drainage line from western side of the property in CTS 331/A.
Further it is directed to DH also not to cause any damage to the property of JD(now after this order JD has constructed & blocked the passage which was open, purposely)during the progress of laying drainage line.
Accordingly,the petition is disposed of.
This is the order.. With the help of this we approached the police when he shown non compliance & threats to life from JD's attitude & sought protection to lay the line.Under police protection line was laid. Jd went to HC with WP which was dismissed. He removed laid line.We approached police they have registered case with sec.427,504,506 r/w 34 of IPC.
Now he has constructed unauthorized door locked to block the way/passage which was for UGD.
Accordingly we approached all authorities like City Engr,Commissioner of Corporation,law officer on direction of The DC,he came inspected & asked to stop work but un-deterred he put slab.& door. Now commissioner also is not taking any action. We have taken photos & filed for injunction. what else do I do? At this age I,my family,sons & grand sons, am being threatened with life. He has bribed all.so we approached The DC.
Anonymous
22 October 2010 at 08:58
Sir,
A property of minor belongs to Muslim religion may file permission petition (for selling property ) to the District Judge or not,any advice and also case laws
Please help me,
Y. HARI HARA NATH BABU, ADVOCATE, NELLORE
CHAUHANMA
21 October 2010 at 23:26
"A" had booked a house with a Builder of Housing Scheme 25 years ago with a total price of Rs.50,000 (inclusive of a loan of Rs.33,000 by a government loan giving agency), and had paid on time about 95% price of the house, 5% was to be paid by "A" at the time of possession. "A" was always ready to make balance payment but the Builder neither accepted the balance payment nor ready to issue possession letter. "A" had also paid 100% amount of loan giving (Government) agency and received back all the original title documents with Redemption Deed of said house. Present market price of the said house, after laps a period of 25 years the current market price of the house is about Rs.5 to 6 lac. Now Builder said to "A" either take Rs.2 lac of your house and give up it or you pay me Rs.2 lac (instead of Rs.1700/= i.e. balance amount payable by "A" ). What do you advise, what course of action should be adopted by "A". A suit for declaration / possession /damages/compensation to be instituted?
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
society lawyer
hi , i need urgently ur suggestion and guidess.actually we have a open terrace and our neighbour is a employee of bmc so she is hareesing us by sending everynw and than notice frm bmc by usuing her contacts and ,we r ask by our secretary nt to put water on out terrace .
pls gv me no of lawyer who can help me this matter is becoming complicated need advocate for guidess. i stay in borivali so gv me reff of anybdy near by so i can personaallly meet and discuss abt d same.