Anonymous
12 August 2011 at 15:03
dear sir,
want to know the diffference between a law court and a quasi judical body, like the public grievance commission delhi.
for purposes of limitation would approaching a body like public grievance commission would be equivalent to approaching a law court
thanks
vk 12 08 11
Anonymous
12 August 2011 at 14:01
Hello Experts,
We have 49 guntha (aar) land. This was on name of my grandmother. On oral partiotion it was given to my father after death of my grandmother in 1984. In 1990, my uncle claimed on this land and in 1992, district court given the order to give 1/3rd part to my uncle.
Now my uncle and father holds that land as 1/3rd and 2/3rd.
We wanted to make the legal partion of this division, but as per "The Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947", we can not make partition of 16.33 aar (1/3rd of my uncle).
As a security, in 2008, we written the holdings on stamp paper, specifying the partition in detail. Court has only made the partition as 1/3rd and 2/3rd, but not specified the 4 surroundings(boundries or Chatur-sima) of individual. On stamp paper made in 2008 we had mentioned boundries of individuals and also mentioned the partiotion as 32:16 aar and 1 aar for common road.
This stamp is notarised by notary in 2008. But we did not registered this document.
Is this document valid to claim my father's right about 32 aars(specifying boundries)?
I am in confusion about oral partition and Registration act 1908 and its section 17.
Thanks.
Dharamvir Yadav
12 August 2011 at 13:49
Please tell me "what is the validity of Land Acquisition Clloctor's report prepared under section 5-A of land acquisition Act.1894. Is it contitutional?
Anonymous
12 August 2011 at 13:38
Dear Experts,
Kindly clarify me the following doubts.
1. When a prosecution witness denies and differs his statement given by him during the preliminary enquiry at the time of regular detailed inquiry while giving deposition before the Inquiry officer.
2. Whether the statement given by the charged official during the preliminary enquiry, can be taken as exhibit by the IO without enquiring with the charged official
by the Prosecution.
3. While giving self explanation by the charged official after prosecution witnesses is over can the IO cross examine or put question to the CO on the basis of the statement given by him during the preliminary enquiry.
4. One document was produced by the prosecution as evidence. The said document was handled and signed by 4 persons. Only two persons were examined based on their signature, the remaining two persons were neither they were brought as PW nor they were enquired.Is it correct or not? If not correct, the reason may pl. be informed
Anonymous
12 August 2011 at 13:16
DEAR EXPERTS , IN OLDEN DAYS THE GRAND FATHERS BROTHERS AND HER FATHERS NAMES WAS ENTERED IN REVENUE RECORDS LONG BACK 100 YEARS BACK ,NOW THE SAME NAMES WAS CONTINUING IN RECORDS STILL DATE ,IN THIS MATTER THE GRAND FATHER ONES NAME WAS GIVEN TO ONE OF MY COUSIN BROTHE AS SAME NAMES AS MY GRND FATHER NAMES .NOW HE WAS SAYING WITH OUT TRANSSFERRING HER NAMES IN REVENUE RECORDS HE WAS THE HOLE NAD SOLE OWNER OF SAID PROPERTIES .IN 1954*55 HIS AGE WAS 14 YEARS CAN HE GOT ANY RIGHTS TO ENTER HER NAME IN KASR PAHANEES I.E.REVENUE RECORDS ?IS HE WAS ELIGIBLE ? HERE MY FATHER NAME WAS NOT INCLUDED IN REVENUE RECORDS. THE ENTIRE PROPERTIES ARE ANSESSTRAL PROPERTIES OOF MY GRAND FATHERS .HOW TO DEAL THIS MATTER TO AVOID THE LITIGATION OF MY COUSIN BROTHER ? KINDLY GIVE SUCH SUZESSTION URGENT/ AND IN 3 VILLAGES REVENUE RECORDS RE SHOWING MY GRAND FATHER NAME ,AND ANOTHER 3 VILLAGES ARE SHOWING MY GRAND FATHERS BROTHERS NAME IN REVENUE RECORDS . KINDLY ADVISE ME
Anonymous
12 August 2011 at 12:31
DEAR ,EXPERTS ,WHAT IS THE ACT 1894 ? IN THIS ACT IF GOVERNAMENT OR PRIVATE INSTITUTION ACQUIRED PATTA LAND AND AWARD PASSED TO REAL OWNER .IN THIS SAME LAND PREVIOUSLY THE PATTEDR WAS SOLDED LAND TO FIRST PARTY BY TAKING HUZE REMUNARATION AND WRITTEN PAPER UN-REISTERED AND HE WAS DIED IN 1960 ,LATER THE LAND WAS UNDER GONE MUTATION IN THE ACTUL PATTEDARS WIFES NAME IN 1961 .THE SAID LAND WAS ACQUIRED BY PRIVATE INSTITUTION IN 1963-66 PERIOD ,CAN THE FIRST PURCHASER GOT ANY RIGHT OR NOT ON THIS LAND AND THE FIRST PARTY PURCHSER WAS NOT GETT INTO REVENUE RECORDS HIS NAME ?IN THIS SITUTATION HOW TO DEAL THE CASE LAND?BY FIRST PARTY PURCHASER? IS THERE ANY REMEDY WILL GET IN COURTS? KINDLY ADVISE URGENT SIR
Anonymous
12 August 2011 at 11:21
dear sir,
once issues are framed will the judgement be on the same issues or
the judge can give a verdict on some other issues that come out during the proceedings.
thanks sir
vinay kala
aug 12,,1
Anonymous
12 August 2011 at 10:52
Please guide me that Govt department is under jurisdiction of CIC. Can I appeal in the concerned State Information Commission, where the office of the department is located or I have to go in the Centre Information Commission ?
Anonymous
12 August 2011 at 06:39
my mother died in june 1989 leaving a will , which has been probated through which i was bequeathed the fully unconstructed second floor of a house at new delhl, the elder brother the ground floor and the younger brother, the first floor.
the younger brother constructed in 1999, as per the tax imposed for this unauthorised construction by the MCD ,a room on the second floor without my permission. subsequently he added two rooms and was running a successful guest house thru use of these three rooms on the second floor.
the delhi high court has decreed after appoint a court commissioner for spot verification that the defendant , my younger brother, who has made this unaothorised construction give an undertaking that he shall use the second floor for no other purpose but residence and if the suit for possession is decreed in my favour , he shall pay me market rent as fixed by the court.
he has cited that he got the second floor in lieu of his share in lucknow property of the testator, incidentally the lucknow property was not owned by the testator but she was a tenant of the lucknow dev authority. this tenancy she passed on thru the will to me, the plaintiff, solely.
in the issues framed the defendant, younger brother has to prove that
1. there was an oral settlement
2. that the law of limitation applies in the present case.
now i want to know how the limitation law applies in my case the facts being tabled below
1. date of death of mother 13.06 1989
2. date i write to MCD for
mutation of property, GF to
elder brother, FF to younger
brother, how def and second
unconstruccted second floor
rights to me including notarsed
copy of will and death cert 26.05.92
3. date mcd responds to this
letter above seeking taxes due
for further action 05.08.1992
4. date i learn of the
unauthorised
construction of
room on second floor 15.06.99
5.dates i write to def
to remove cons and hand
vacant 30.06.99
possession
6. dateS i write to MCD to removeunauthorsed construction 16.8.99, 15.10.99, 12.10.99 etc
7. date from which MCD
imposes tax for unauthorsed
construction 01.04.99
8 date i file complaint with
PGC, Delhi against MCD for no
action to remove construtttion 01.01.2000
9 date PGC writes to MCD for
report on unauthorised cons 03.03.2000
10 date on which CIC passes
stricture against MCD for failing to
remove unauthorsed construction
on second appeal by me 15.07.99
11.Date i file a case at tis
hazari for permanent injunction
against def 15.03.2007
12. date i witdraw case with
liberty to file another on same
cause of action 31.07.10
13 date i file suit for
possession with high court
delhi 04.09.2010
14. date issues of limitation
and oral settlement framed
OPD 04.08.2011
MY QUERY IS :-
1.DOES THE SUIT SUFFER FROM ANY LIMITATION
DEFECTS.
2. ONE FAMILY MEMBER IS DEAD. EXCEPT FOR US THE TWO SURVIVING MEMBERS SHALL NOT TESTIFY IN FAVOUR OF EITHER ME OF THE DEFENDANT. IT IS ME VERSUS DEFENDANT.
THE WILL, PROBATED HAS PASSED THE TENANCY RIGHTS TO ME OF LKO PROPERTY SOLELY. THE LKO PROPERTY I REPEAT WAS NOT OWNED BY MOTHER WHO WAS A TENANT .
KINDLY GUIDE
VINAY KALA AUG 12,11
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Whether dismissal of slp aginst the high court order will affect my new writ petition?
Sir,
The CAT has allowed my petition which was remanded back by the HC for deciding one issue before CAT.I challenged the HC order by the way of SLP before Supreme Court of India which was dismissed. The CAT had pronounced an order against me. Now I am Planning to file the writ Petition against that latest order of the CAT by the way of writ petition
My query is whether HC consider it negative as i had moved to SC against the previous order which has remanded it back?