Anonymous
07 April 2010 at 13:52
I bought a commercial office building, where my company was and still is, a tenant, under Sarfaesi Act 2002 at a bank foreclosure auction. After a 2 year legal battle (appeals upto SC by the borrower/Owner and again at DRT) the title was vested in me. I managed to throw the Owner/borrower out. But a pre-exisiting commercial tenant (actually two companies under same proprietor) refuses to vacate, has not been paying the pre-existing rent etc.).
My attorney filed 2 cases for eviction under the Rent Control courts, against the 2 companies. Almost 2 years later, it still has not come to trial, while the tenant continues to enjoy the property rent free.
Could this have been filed any where else other than the Rent Control ? I am told that this should have been easy and quick and should have been filed in HC, due to purchase under Sarfaesi? Even if I get the eviction order from Rent control (or HC), I am told that this can go onto appeal? The tenant is hard to work with. Answers & advise?
Suri.Sravan Kumar
06 April 2010 at 20:37
the question is the owner of the car (private car meant for personal use) let out his car on hire to some persons. The vehicle met with an accident and one of the passenger in the car died and his LR'S filed claim petition before MACT claiming compensation against the owner of the car as well as Insurance Co.
In the cross examination it is proved that the deceased paid Rs 3000/- as fare charges.
the point is since the vehicle is a private car and the car was let out on hire Policy does not cover hire or reward.
Any judgements to show that Insurance company is not liable to pay compensation as the vehicle was let out on hire.
jayachandran
04 April 2010 at 11:49
Our client had refused to accept the L/C wherein the purchaser extended its validity without specific authorisation or permission from the beneficiary.
Whether the beneficiary can refuse to accept the L/C.
Will it amount to termination of contract automatically.
What is the consequences.
PL. answer
Jibanananda Goswami
01 March 2010 at 02:14
http://www.openrti.co.cc/
Kindly visit the link. If the page have any problem, download the zip file. I have never heard of this type problem before. If anybody have seen this type problem, kindly post an article in this club.
The main question confusing me is "Why these are going on?" This is not a normal situation. Most people generally search legal advice in abnormal position. But this case is beyond my range. I can go to the Court and fight and win, but I failed to understand the reason on the actions. So I am putting the problem for the world. Kindly analyze and help.
Manish Kumar Gupta
05 February 2010 at 19:28
Dear All
We remember that levy of service tax on ‘Rent’ was held ultra vires by Delhi High Court in case of Home Solution Retail India Ltd. Vs. UOI and others (2009) 20 STT 129. Union of India- who was the respondent in said judgment filed a SLP in Supreme Court, praying inter alia for stay of operation of Delhi High Court judgment. However, the Supreme Court did not stay the operation of Delhi High Court judgment, but issued notices to parties concerned to file their replies. During pendency of matter in Supreme Court, Revenue authorities instructed their field officers by way of Instructions dated 15thJuly 2009 to take necessary action to safeguard revenue by either pursuing the tax payer to pay up the service tax or resort to means under law. The Instructions issued on 15 July 2009 were challenged by SSIPL Retail Ltd. in a Writ petition filed before Delhi High Court who has taken strong objection to said Instructions and it was assured by Additional Solicitor General, appearing on behalf of the Union of India, that corrective steps will be taken to issue further instruction, in super session of earlier instructions, to not to demand service tax till such time Supreme Court decides the SLP.
We want one clarification that if it is applicable on the properties situated in other states.
Please resopond.
Regards,
Manish
We
vinod kumar singh
08 January 2010 at 11:06
I want to purchase a premises of which Rent Reciept is in name of Pvt Ltd. Comany.
in view of that i am taking over the company by purchsaseing the shares of compnay in my name. Rent receipt shall be contiune in the name of original name only.
in future, can Landlord sue that there is a trasfer of shares violate the provision of tenancy laws and can file eviction suit against purchaser.
M. PIRAVI PERUMAL
07 January 2010 at 14:12
Can any of our learned members provide me any GO issued by Government of Tamil Nadu in respect of usage of special adhesive (NJS)in affidavit to be sworn before notary public ?
Sekhar P
02 October 2009 at 17:17
Father gifted the house to ist son with regd gift deed with love and effection and no conditions mentioned.
After 6 months of gift deed, father revoked the gift deed with revocation of gift deed with mentioning that the son is not taking care and not providing food etc.
Immediately after 1 week, father executed transferred the house with sale deed on second sons name.
Please let me know/advice: Is it right that revocation of gift is correct and further steps to be taken.
akash jain
06 September 2009 at 17:08
I have purchased a residential property near about 30 yrs back.We got the sale deed Registered through the power of attorney holder of the seller.
The property is muted by us in Muncipal records from then and we are staying there peacefully till now and paying all dues etc in our name as owner.
Recently the owner,3 years back ,after knowing that we lost the copy of power of attorney of seller,refused the registry and given ground that he left the place at the of Registry,and he never sold the property to us.
The registered deed of sale contains Income Tax permission under Section 230A[1],of I.T .Act 1961,which was signed by the original parties and is attached in the Registry.The I.T. permission was from the other State,where the seller was filling Income Tax returns and having their Head Office.
Now,can I call the Income Tax Dept of that State from where the order was issued to Seller,for witness in Civil Court,where I filled Title deed suit against the Seller.The said Order or Permission Order U/S 230A[1] of I.T Act,1961 ,was taken before 30 yrs by the seller.
-what is the process to call them?
-IS Civil Court of one State is having Rights to Call for witness from some another state of India,Or we have to go there,to that State,with my Lawyer,Oath Commissioner,appointed by Court for taking the statement Income Tax Dept of that State?
-Can I will get reply from that Dept. ,after 30 yrs about its verification of that order?
-Can I take use of Right to Information Act,and get some useful reply from that Dept. and avoid going their,so long and incurring so much expenses?
-If I can take use of Right to Information Act,what I must ask to them and for expenses ,what and in which Form I have to send money for getting information from I.T Dept.?
_ I.T Dept may refuse to give reply,as the document and information needed by me is of more than 30 yrs old,so what may be appropriate way to ask them ,so as to get reply required for purpose?
What else help and valuable opinion of yours can be received to me in such a matter?
What was the clauses of Section 230A[1],of I.T .Act 1961 and what was the process in Year 1978 to get the Permission under that section of I.T Act,1961?
Please help me and oblidged.
Thanking You sirs,
Akash Maheshwari
Member Strength 9,49,584 and growing..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Chennai HC ruling on public purpose land
CHENNAI H C IN JUDGEMENT ON 12.4.07 IN THE CASE FILED BY DEVI NAGAR RESIDENTS, COIAMBATORE HAS RULED THAT THE LAND ALLOTED FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE CANNOT BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT IS RESERVED. I PURCHASED A 2400 SQ.FT LAND APPROVED BY CMDA, RESERVED FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE IN 1998 BUT IT IS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN THE APPROVAL GIVEN BY THE CMDA THAT THE SAID LAND IF NOT TAKEN BY THE GOVT. WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF APPROVAL, COULD BE SOLD BY THE PROMOTER BUT SUCH LAND SHOULD BE USED FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE ONLY. KINDLY CLARIFY THE ABOVE POINT. WHETHER I CAN SELL THE LAND ?
I GOT REPLY FROM MR. RAJ KUMAR MAKKAD THAT I COULD SELL THE LAND FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE. MR R R KRISHNA IS REQUESTED TO CLARIFY THE FOLLOWING.
SINCE THE CMDA HAS PERMITTED TO USE THE LAND FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE ONLY AND I BELIEVED IT AND PURCHASED. CAN I SELL THE LAND FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSE?. MANY PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY CONSTRUCTED HOUSES ON SUCH LAND AFTER OBTAINING APPROVAL FROM THE LOCAL BODY PRIOR TO THIS JUDGEMENT. IN WHAT WAY THIS JUDGEMENT AFFECTS PEOPLE LIKE ME AND THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ALREADY CONSTRUCTED HOUSES ON SUCH LAND?