Anonymous
13 September 2011 at 12:13
Dear Friends of the forum,
In a case; Mr.'A', got the property through a WILL from Mrs.'F'. Mr.'B',GPA holder of Mr.'A' applies for mutation in MRO office in the year 1976,but no action was taken afterwards.Lately this property came Mrs.'S' through a WILL from Mr.'A', in the year 2009 . During enquiry Mrs.'S' found the above facts and lot of the property is sold by Mr.'B', in the capacity of GPA holder of Mr.'A'.and in some cases Mr.'B' has given GPAs to the 3rd parties [on perusal of GPA {Given by Mr.'A'to MR.'B' } Mr.'B' don't have this right!].
Kindly guide me action/s to be taken by Mrs.'S'. (This property is in AP state.)
1) Can she approach civil court for mutation properties as per the letter of Mr.'A' given in the year 1976?
2) What about the properties sold by Mr.'B' by virtue of GPAs he had given to 3rd parties?
3) Any other remedies you suggest?
Thanking you ALL in advance expecting quick reply please.
N.J. MISHRA
13 September 2011 at 12:13
dear member kinldy advice: -
As per Bombay Stamp Act, all the agreements are required to be registered; otherwise it is inadmissible in the court of law during any dispute. my query is that whether Hire Purchase and Financial Employment Bond agreement are required to be registered. what other types of agreement are not required to be registered?
sood
12 September 2011 at 22:10
In case a dispute arises within a charitable Society regd.under the Act. amongst the members. Which is the Compentent court to adjudicate. Is it a civil court or the Registrar of Societies. The Society is registered in Chandigarh.
Anonymous
12 September 2011 at 20:56
WE HAVE FILED A CONTEMPT CASE AGAINST A FLAT OWNER OF OUR APARTMENT FOR ENCROACHING IN THE COMMON AREA INSPITE OF A COURT ORDER FOR STAY OF CONSTRUCTION AND AGAINST THE MUNCIPAL CORPORATION FOR NOT TAKING NECESSARY ACTION TO STOP THE CONSTRUCTION,
THE PARTY IN THEIR COUNTER STATED THAT THEY DID NOT MAKE ANY CONSTRUCTION AFTER THE STAY ORDER.
THE CORPORATION IN THEIR COUNTER AFFADAVIT STATED AS THE PARTY HAS APPROACHED THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND OBTAINED AN INTERIM STAY WHICH HAS BEEN DISMISSED AND AS THE CORPORATION HAS REJECTED THE REGULARISATION APPLIED BY THE PARTY THEY WOULD DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE IMMEDIATELY.
BUT THIS HAS NOT BEEN DONE AS THE PARTY APPROACHED THE ADDL. CHIEF JUDGE IN A CMA AND HAS TAKEN A STAUS QUO.
THEY HAVE TAKEN THE INTERIM STAY BY CONCEALING THE FACT THAT THERE IS A CASE PENDING IN THE HIGH COURT.
WE WANTED TO BRING THIS TO THE NOTICE OF THE HIGH COURT, BUT THE C.C IS NOT ABLE TO REACH THE BENCH EVEN IF IT IS BEING LISTED FOR THE DAY.
WHAT COURSE OF ACTION SHOULD WE TAKE TO BRING THIS TO THE NOTICE OF THE COURT. OUR LAWYER SAY AS THE JUDGE IS SITTING IN A DIVISION BENCH AND IS SITTING ONLY ONCE IN A WEEK AS SINGLE JUDGE THE CASE IS BEING DELAYED, IT WOULD REACH ONCE THE JUDGE SITS SINGLE.
THIS C.C HAS BEEN LIKE THIS FOR THE PAST ONE YEAR.
ANY SUGGESTIONS PLEASE.
Anonymous
12 September 2011 at 20:26
i had sold a 35sqft land to one person in 2002 which was situated in haryana.i give him a reciept on blank paper wroted, recived rs --,---/- n negiotiate on meating, without declaring that the sum is recived for land. in 2010 i purchased back the aforsiade land for rs --,---+30,000/- and recived back the reciept. in august 2011 he come back with some another strong persons and ordered me to make the registery in his favour. he had also made the 6ft boundery around the plot and locked that. he show me the photo copy of the reciept which was earlier issued by me. how can i proceeds to get the plot?
swaraj
12 September 2011 at 16:08
respected sir
i am govt.school teacher,and our staff members salary account is with union bank account.
this month when we approach my school clerk for our salary status ,the clerk replied that the check is submitted by me to union bank account last week ,why ur salary is not yet transferred to staff accounts,then the staff members approached the bank manager ,in turn the bank manager replied that the whole amount is transferred to school principle personel salary account ,instead of govt. account now it up to principle to transfered all salary to their staff members account,
then we approach pricipal ,then the principle transfered all salary to respective staff member's account.
the salary amount is rs 16 lac .
now my qwestion is follow:
1.is it legal that the salary amount could be transfered directly to principal account instead of govt. account.
2. is it come under the corruption that the priciple consipiracy for gaining interest of rs 16 lac in there personnel account with the help of bank manager.
pl. help how to stop these type of corruption
thanks swaraj
Anonymous
12 September 2011 at 15:33
Dear Sirs,
This case is pertaining to State of AP. State Govt., acquired land ( Inam land)for a road widening in the year 1995.
Notification was published on :23-11-1995,
Comp.Award given by Collector on:10-12-1999,and referred the case to Civil Court U/s 31(2), citing the dispute, 1) Inam land & PT on the land , 2) Under Urban Land Ceiling.The Court returned the Cheque for want of Validity of the Cheque in the year 2000.
On verification it is found the Cheque is lying in the office of RDO, even today.Hence the case is not filed in the court.
This land came to my father through WILL from my Grand Mother, and to me through a WILL from my Father in the year 2010.
On application to RDO, for compensation ( and also for O R C ) for this land; he called for report from the Tahsildar wherein he stated that there is no PT on the land and Inamdar is My Grand mother( even today the same name is continuing).
The problem now is, the RDO says neither my Grandmother nor my father applied for the O R C. And at the time of Land acquisition, the Land was INAM Land; and hence vest with the Govt.,as per the Inam abolition act of the state.
Recently, i have obtained Clearance from ULC authorities.
Now what should i do, to over come this obstacle from the Revenue Authorities.
Please guide me how go about this...
Thanking you ALL , expecting QUICK solution to this problem,PLEASE.
Rajat sahotra
12 September 2011 at 13:14
Dear Experts,
one of my neighbour telephonically lodged a complaint tp police station of noise and disturbaance from my flat at night around 11 PM.
We came late from a tour and were having discussions and dinner at that time and some of our relatives and gusets were also presnt at that time for dinner.
Police came and they said we have a complaint against you for disturbance ad noise. but on talking to them they said they were also standing outside from 10 mnutes and it aws quite and were normal noises from the house but nothing serious found andthey went back.
now can i give a notice for seeking compensation for causing mental agony and harassment for making false complaint and a civil suit for compensation against my neighbour.
Please provide the format of notice for seeking compensation for causing mental agony and harassment for making false complaint.
kindly advise
SAA_Bombay
12 September 2011 at 13:07
Our's is a redeveloped society. now, our builder wants to make a shop in stilt parking which is under sale wing not rehab building. but in our redevelopment agree he mentioned that he will not build any commercial office / shop here. Now, when we refused for any society NOC for same, he says he will build shop without any permission from society. I have heard that as per supreme court order, builder or society has no right to sale stilt parking. He has covered the stilt parking & is not allowing any person to park car there. secondly, is not handing over the society office & is using same as storage for him. what shall we do??
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Partition suit
Sir,
A petitioner filed one partition suit which is pending from 2005 in a District Munsiff Court and trial not yet commenced. In which many people are respondents in this suit and some of them sold some of the suit properties. What action is to be taken against this? Whether any separate petition is to be filed against the concerned respondents and buyers or to implead the buyers as respondents in the partition suit itself?