Salehsalim
16 January 2014 at 15:25
Dear Sirs,
I have a question wrt acquisition of private individual's land for slum redevelopment.
The current law provides for very meagre compensation to land owners in sases where the land is acquired for redevelopment of declared slums.
With the new Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition....Act 2013 haveing come into force all over India wef 1/1/2014, will acquisition of land under Maharashtra Slum Rehablitation Act also apply to these situations ?
I am being advised that, since the old LA Act did not apply to this enactment, the new LA Act (RTFCLARR Act 2013) also will not apply.
Would appreciate your clarification.
Regards,
Saleh M Salim
raghurama
16 January 2014 at 13:25
My father name mentioned in his School admission is Ningappa Giriyappa Moolya. But my school certificate my father name mentioned is N.G Moolya. I want to change my father name is Ningappa Giriyappa Moolya insted of N.G Moolya. It is possible??
MSC Shekar
16 January 2014 at 11:42
In all land acquisition advertisments in the News papers. In the Type of Land Column "Custodian Land" some times is mentioned.
What does this "Custodian Land" means.
In this connection arises another query if there is a Custodian Land, Can any private individual (other than Custodian) create a Gift on such land ?
Please clarify cusdodian land as well as the other query raised in connection with this subject.
Thanks in advance.
RAJESH KUMAR
16 January 2014 at 11:42
Sir,
A plot was allotted in favour of a partnership firm namely HIC Products on 13.5.1990 and the Conveyance Deed was also executed in the name of said partnership firm through its partners 1. Sh. Mohan Lal & 2. Sh. Ramesh Kumar. One of the its partner Sh. Mohan lal had died on 1.2.2008 and his LRs. Subhash etc. requested the Authority to indusct them as co-owners in the captioned plot.
In the meantime Sh. Ramesh Kumar intimating the Authority that Sh. Mohan Lan had resigned from the partnership firm and a new partner Mrs. Reena w/o Ramesh Kumar was admitted and requested to make necessary amendments in the records. As per retirement deed dated 1.4.2002, Sh. Mohan Lal retired from the firm from the close of business on 31.03.2002 and as per partnership deed dated 1.4.2002 Mrs. Reena was induscted as a partner in the firm. Thereafter on 7.1.2011, Sh. Ramesh Kumar & Mrs. Reena requested the Authority for change in constitution from the partnership to a Pvt. Ltd. Company under the name and style M/s HEC Pvt. Ltd. promoted by them.
The fact about retirement of Sh. Mohan Lal and indusction of Mrs. Reena, which took place in the year 2002, was never informed to the Authority.
Sh. Ramesh Kumar on 10.9.2011 has submitted a copy of Form-A issued by Registrar of Firms on 1.9.2011 registering retirement of Sh. Mohan Lal and admission of Mrs. Reena w.e.f. 01.4.2002. Vide letter dated 10.8.2011, the LRs of Sh. Mohan Lal informed that no surrender of right deed was executed by them.
Vide letter dated 1.4.2013, Sh. Ramesh Kumar submitted a copy of order dated 20.3.2013 passed by Civil Judge in case title Reena V/s Ramesh Kumar etc. whereby Mrs. Reena was declared as the sole partner with Sh. Ramesh Kumar in the partnership firm and the said declaration was against the General Public.
A legal notice was also served on behalf of Mrs. Reena for implementation of the orders of the Civil Court.
It is also mention here that one of the sons of Sh. Mohan Lal had also signed the retirement deed as one of the witnesses and the said retirement deed was never challenged by the legal heirs of Sh. Mohan Lal in any court.
In view of the above facts of the case, the issues involved in this case are as under:
1. Whether the claims of legal heirs of Sh. Mohan Lal for a right in the plot in question shall be considered by the Authority or not since, upon demise of Sh. Mohan Lal a right had accured in favour of LRs of Sh. Mohan Lal in the property of the firm.
2. Whether in absence of relinquishment of right by the legal heirs of Sh. Mohan Lal, the authority can consider the request for transfer of plot in favour of new partnership firm/company in view of compliance of the order of the Civil Court passed in favour of Mrs. Reena.
kumar
16 January 2014 at 11:31
A obtains a site on account of providing his property for a government organisation for lay out development and recives the money also. In addition he also obgtain a site in the lay out by governement organisation with 50% concession. The property and title got registered in his name.
After this he sell the property to a person by the name 'A'
Then 'A' sells the property to 'B'
After 10 years of purchase by 'B', the orginal owners duaguters and son have filed a suit petition to claim 1/4th share.
Is it right and what 'B' has to do. B took the site from A through Bank loan 10 years back.
Please advice me
Member (Account Deleted)
16 January 2014 at 10:16
We were a family of parents and 4 siblings.(eldest daughter D1 and 3 sons S1,S2,S3)
D1 got married and moved to US.
S1 got married and stayed in a separate flat on rent .
So that leaves parents and S2 ,S3 who stayed together in one flat. Father ran a business with him being proprietor and S1,S2 salaried employees.
At this time a flat was purchased in the name of S1. Parents and S1,S2,S3 contributed towards the purchase.
Does this flat come under the purview of Hindu Undivided Family property?
Do all the Siblings have a share in the flat or does only S1 have exclusive ownership as the title deed is in his name, if the flat is sold or goes for redevelopment?
amol
16 January 2014 at 06:34
Sirs,
May I know as to whether a Civil Suit for seeking damages and injunction from restraining to share confidential data is maintainable against a employee of the comapny which is a finance company on the ground that the code of conduct , ethics and discipline of the company has been breached by him by parting with the confidential data of the company to others third persons. following are the circumstances under which we have to examine as to suit is maintainable or not
1) the IT act, 2000 provide a special statutory remedy as criminal offense FIR can be lodged the same has not been lodged
2) the suit was filed after terminating the employee without inquiry conducted against him
3) the code and conduct if any breached that provide departmental remedy of inquiry which was not conducted by company against him
4)suit is on the ground that this empolyee by sharing financial information to outside persons could have earned 25 lakhs as a commission so that far are the damages caused to comapny
So now without lodging FIR , investigation allegations that employee is still having some information and he had parted the same erlier can be tenable in the suit as a ground to recover the amount and seek injunction against the employee
Please guide sir as to whether suit is maintainable ? I am for the employee defendant in the above Suit
thanks
niky......
15 January 2014 at 23:51
We are about to file an Amendment to WS with new exhibits. Original WS had 2 Exh. A & B.
And my lawyer is saying for the new exhibits we are will to write in amendment as Exh. C, D , etc.
But a consultant lawyer is suggesting that we should not write C, D etc. the numbering to the Exhibit will be given by court. In amendment keep the number as blank ..example: Exhibit _
Which one of this should i follow? Thanks.
gopalaswamyb
15 January 2014 at 21:47
what are the duties of an administer and is there any time limit .one of the benificiery is an administrator and his share is less
so he is silent in executing the will.This has resulted the other benificiery not able to do mutation and dispose of the property.
what is the legal remedy.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Permanent lok adalat and 340 crpc
Can I file application U/s 340 Cr.P.C. for taking appropriate action against Sub Divisional Engineer, State Power Corporation Limited, for tendering false affidavit and registering of FIR U/s 193 IPC.
In a matter pending at Permanent Lok Adalat for exorbitant electricity bill when I was not residing in the house at all, SDEr gave false information to Permanent Lok Adalat by way of evidence on affidavit that I have not paid electricity bill while I have done so and a receipt has been issued by his office in this regard.does the permanent lok addalat have any power in respect to inquiry U/s 340 Crpc.what else can I do?