Adv. Deepak
23 July 2013 at 22:43
Resp. Members,
An amount of Rs.5 lacs was kept in joint postal MIS account of A and B. A is father-in-law of B. A's wife and B's husband are the nominees for the said account. A died. As per postal rules, B being the sole surviving account holder, account got converted in the name of B. B prematurely closed the account and received the money. A's wife and A's son who is the husband of B filed civil suit for recovery of the said amount from B. Suit was dismissed holding that under Sec.14(1) of Hindu Succession Act, B is the owner of the money. The Original Plaintiffs A's wife and B's husband preferred an appeal against the jugement and decree. In the original suit, a wrong issue was framed by the trial court that whether Defendant proves that she being nominee of the said account, she is entitled to receive the money and the court has held that Defendant No.1 proved the said fact. The said issue was decided affirmatively that is in favour of Defendant B. Now, in the appeal, can Defendant B file cross objection that the issue though it was decided in her favour, was framed wrongly. Can Defendant raise a dispute by way of cross objection in the appeal that though a particular issue is decided in the trial court in her favour, that issue itself is wrong and she is not the nominee of the said account. The said fact has been proved before the trial court and Plaintiffs have admitted the said fact. Is it possible to raise such cross objection?
Your kind advice is requested.
sk..........
23 July 2013 at 20:05
my neighbour occupied my land by 16 sq.yards i am filing suit as party in person ,
1- what is the court fees to be paid .pl. mention appr. amount.
2- should i make municipal authority a party in case or not necessary.
3-
virupanagouda
23 July 2013 at 20:00
A got land from her husband for her life time maintenance, which is the property of husband's father. That, later she bequeathed to her 3 sons out of 6 sons through WILL. Each sons got equal share. Her grand son filed a suit for partition against his father. Now the question is, WHETHER THE SAID PROPERTY IS THE SELF ACQUIRED PROPERTY OF "A" OR NOT? IF SO, which section of Sec. 14 (1) or (2)of Hindu Succession Act applies?
RAJESH KUMAR
23 July 2013 at 19:33
A industrial plot was resumed by the Corporation on account of default of payment. The allottee filed a civil suit challenging resumption order. The said suit was dismissed as default by the Civil Judge. The allottee filed an application for restoration of suit, the same was also dismissed. Against the said dismissal order the allottee filed an Appeal before District Judge, the appeal was also dismissed. Against the dismissal of Appeal, the allottee filed Civil Revision before High court, notice of motion was issued by the High Court, in the mean time the allottee had died. An application for impleading as legal heirs of deceased/allottee is filed by deceased friend on the basis of registered will. The applicant is not in blood relation of allottee. Please tell me on what ground the application is apposed by the Corporation. In this regard, if any case citation is available tell me.
It is pertinent to mention here that due to non payment of installments of plot in question, the conveyance deed was not executed only allotment letter was issued by the Corporation.
Ashok Kuvadia
23 July 2013 at 16:42
NON-COMPLIANCE OF MANDATORY PROVISIONS OF LAW AND ITS REPERCUSSIONS:
(01) Dear Experts, in anticipation I am thankful to all of you for giving me your valued Opinion, which helps a lot to people like me who are fighting for Justice and their Rights in person and gives moral supports too.
(02) I have filed a Dispute at Co-operative Court, Mumbai, appearing in person since last Seven years, against my Society which is Co-operative Ownership Housing Society.
(03) The Committee elected on 28.07.2005 of our Society did not executed Indemnity Bond within 15 days, which otherwise mandatory as per Section 73(1AB) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960, to execute till 12.08.2005.
Section 73(1AB) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960 is read as under :
"The Members of the Committee shall be jointly and severally responsible for all the decisions taken by the committee during its term relating to the business of the society. The members of the committee shall be jointly and severally responsible for all the acts and omissions detrimental to the interest of the society. Every such member shall execute a bond to that effect within fifteen days of his assuming the office, in the form as specified by the State Government by general or special order. The member, who fails to execute such bond within the specified period i.e. within fifteen days from joining the Managing Committee member, shall be DEEMED TO HAVE VACATED HIS OFFICE AS A MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE."
Rule 58-A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules 1961 is read as under :
"Every elected member of the Managing Committee shall execute a bond in Form M-20 within fifteen days of his assuming the office. Such bond shall be executed on the stamp paper as provided under the Bombay Stamp Act 1958. The expenditure on stamp paper shall be borne by the society. The Chief Executive Officer / secretary of the society shall receive such bonds and keep them on record of the society and accordingly inform the Registrar within Fifteen days from the formation of the Committee."
(04) Without execution of Indemnity Bond they executed Development Agreement and Irrevocable Power of Attorney giving Development Rights to a builder on 17.06.2006.
(05) I believe, in view of the non-execution of the Indemnity bonds in form M-20 within the period prescribed by Sec. 73 (1AB) of the M.C.S. Act 1960, the committee members, from 13.08.2005, had ceased to be the members of Committee and they incurred automatic disqualification by operation of law. It is a settled law that the provision u/s 73 (1AB) is mandatory, salutary and imperative and not the directory since the section itself provides the consequences of automatic disqualification by operation of law for its non-compliance.
(06) I believe that, therefore, Development Agreement & Irrevocable General Power of Attorney executed on 17.06.2006 becomes illegal, null & void.
(07) Due to non-compliance of said statutory provisions Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies suspended the Committee on 18.04.2007 (i.e. after execution of documents to builder).
(08) Due to Cardiac problem I could not file my final Written Argument and Court dispose matter rejecting my all plea (issues).
(09) In impugned order, Ld. Judge did not declare Development Agreement & Irrevocable General Power of Attorney as illegal, null & void by holding that--
(a) It can be deemed that Chairman & Secretary have vacated the office of the managing committee of society.
(b) However, the execution of documents to builder was during the period when they were holding the post of Chairman & Secretary (i.e. before suspended by Dy. Registrar). Therefore in view of the act done in good faith by any person appointed, shall not be invalid merely by reason of the fact that his appointment has been cancelled by or in consequence of any order subsequently passed under this act, rules and the bye-laws.
MY QUERY:
In view of the above facts & circumstances--
(a) Chairman & Secretary had ceased to be the members of Committee and they incurred automatic disqualification by operation of law u/s 73 (1AB) which is mandatory, salutary and imperative and not the directory. Do they have any power to execute any documents to builder giving development rights?
(b) Development rights given by such disqualified persons to builder are valid and legitimate?
(c) The holding of Ld. Judge that though deemed that Chairman & Secretary have vacated their office, however, the execution of documents to builder was during the period when they were holding the post of Chairman & Secretary (i.e. before suspended by Dy. Registrar). Do these holdings of Ld. Judge that Chairman & Secretary were holding the post, though disqualified by statute, are valid and legitimate?
(d) Not declaring Development Agreement & Irrevocable General Power of Attorney executed on 17.06.2006 as illegal, null & void by Ld. Judge is valid and legitimate?
(e) Is my holding above in Pt.:(06) that, documents executed on 17.06.2006 becomes illegal, null & void; is valid and legitimate?
(f) Any other suggestion?
N.B.: Since I have kept my Query to limited issue only, therefore not explaining about whole matter.
Thanking all in anticipation, once again.
Ashok.
(ashok.kuvadia@gmail.com/098691 02755)
Ashok Kuvadia
23 July 2013 at 16:36
CAN FINAL DECREE BE PASSED ON PRESUMPTION? IS IT VALID?
(01) Dear Experts, in anticipation I am thankful to all of you for giving me your valued Opinion, which helps a lot to people like me who are fighting for Justice and their Rights in person and gives moral supports too.
(02) I have filed a Dispute at Co-operative Court, Mumbai, appearing in person since last Seven years, against my Society which is Co-operative Ownership Housing Society.
(03) Due to mental stress suffering since last seven years I get Cardiac problem and was hospitalized for same. When again I went to Court, I suffered a severe relapse in health and it suddenly started deteriorating. Cardiologist again advised complete rest without mental stress. I filed adjournment application, rejected by Court. Due to same, I could not file my final Written Argument and Court dispose matter rejecting my all plea (issues).
(04) In impugned order, Ld. Judge rejected my plea by holding that--
(a) In one of the circular of our Society it has mentioned--(i) “IN LAST THREE FOUR MEETING members shown interest to develop property”; and (ii) “Preliminary permission of the Municipal Corporation for TDR was obtained”. (But, there are no documents to support this claim).
(b) Ld. Judge hold while delivering order that-- therefore from this circular it can be inferred that there was meeting held for considering the issue of development of the building. Thus this goes to show about the possibility of meeting held on 30.03.2003.
(08) Thus, I believe that, Judge has given his findings merely on the bases of presumption of contents of circular wherein it has mentioned that- “IN LAST THREE FOUR MEETING members shown interest to develop property”.
MY QUERY:
(a) Can it be said that Ld. Judge has passed Order merely on the bases of presumption?
(b) Can Ld. Judge passed Order merely on the bases of presumption?
(c) Order passed merely on the bases of presumption is valid and lawful in the eyes of law?
(d) Any possible remedy please be suggested?
N.B.: Since I have kept my Query to limited issue only, therefore not explaining about whole matter.
Thanking all in anticipation, once again.
Ashok. (098691 02755)
charanjeet
23 July 2013 at 09:04
Dear Sir,
My name is Charanjeet Singh, resident of INDIA.
2 months before i received a fraud call from one of the insurance company with name and fame in india ( i.e LIC) i already had policies with them .
One of the person called me saying that i am from LIC and we are issuing some bonus cheques from LIC insurance provided you buy 2 policies of RELIANCE insurance ( some other insurance compnay )else you wont get the benefit.
my father is handicapped and senior citizen , i had saved some money to get his treatment done which i invested with this fraud LIC agent call and invested this money on RELIANCE insurance of USD 2000/- now RELIANCE company received my email and agreed that it was fraud done on you.
i handed over USD 2000/- to the agent by cheque on the name of RELIANCE life insurance,I want to know if RELIANCE LIFE gives me full money as there is 99% probability of paying me my money of USD 2000/- by Reliance without filing case on them ,since the case is now crystal clear with them, on the top of that i want to know what is the maximum amount i can claim for doing Fraud and Harassment with me and keeping my investment in their company for 2 months.
Ashok Kuvadia
23 July 2013 at 08:48
(01) Dear Experts, in anticipation I am thankful to all of you for giving me your valued Opinion, which helps a lot to people like me who are fighting for Justice and their Rights in person and gives moral supports too.
(02) I have filed a Dispute at Co-operative Court, Mumbai, appearing in person since last Seven years, against my Society which is Co-operative Ownership Housing Society.
(03) The Opponent Society has filed its Affidavit of examination-in-chief, wherein it has mentioned that--
“The records of Society were taking to auditor while taking it in the car. The said records were lost. Complaint to that effect has been lodged at Police Station. Copy of the said N.C. (complaint) is annexed”. They produced the Xerox copy to court by getting it verified & certified with its original by Court.
(04) However, the said document is not get admitted by Opponent by calling the Police authority, who gave that N.C. (complaint), as witness.
(05) Secondly, to substantiate LOST, they annexed the News Paper advertisement given about LOST with their in-chief.
My Query:
(01) Can the N.C. (Police complaint) be treated as admitted document, without getting it admitted by calling Police authority as witness who issued same?
(02)-(a) Can the News Paper advertisement about LOST is a valid evidence as per Evidence Act? (b) Can anyone please provide me any Judgment/Order of Apex Court and/or High Court?
N.B.: Since I have kept my Query to limited issue only, therefore not explaining about whole matter.
Thanking all in anticipation, once again.
Ashok. (098691 02755)
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Legal meaning
Hi all,
Legal meaning of the below...
All that the piece and parcel of land admeasuring ?????
Thank you...