Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 16:18
sir i am a plaitniff in a suit relating to partition. i studied upto 10th class (telugu medium). i brought a partition suit against my full blood brother. the cause of action mentioned by my counsel was with out my knowledge and during my cross examination i have stated against to the cause of action, as per my counsel's advice, which resulted in the dismissal of the suit and the same counsel has gone for appeal with same cause of action unfortunatley he passed away recently. later i came to know about the controversy in my suit after approaching another counsel. now pls suggest me what i can do as the suit's property is worth of 100 crores. the suit property is ancesstral.pl suggest me as early as possible
thanking you
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 16:16
Dear Sir
My mother had acquired two row houses of her brothers asset and lettervof administration is been issued thru madras high court . now the problem is that she is very old nearing 80 and she wants to nominate me as her only son for the assets to be distributed since if she sells it now it can capture hightax capital gain but when we enquire our lawyer what he says is that with the letter of administration what she got she cannot nominate her children but she can sell it off by with holding for more that three years for gaining low tax capital gain. Sir pl advice in this regard since i am totally confused
regards
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 16:13
I, Swarup Modak, an inhabitant of Bidisha Housing of Konnagar, Hooghly and a member of Bidisha Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (in short the ‘Society’), Konnagar, Hooghly. The said membership is duly approved by the Co-operation Directorate, Hooghly Range (Former: Office of the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Hooghly).
I purchased one residential flat of 477 sq. ft. at Bidisha Housing Project Ph-II (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Project’), Konnagar Hooghly which is promoted by the West Bengal Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Board’), Kolkata.
I have purchased the aforesaid flat after being satisfied the free space of the General Common Areas of the Project. During purchase there was neither any Cycle/Two-Wheeler Stand nor any Flagpole base with sophisticated fence in any place of the General Common Areas of the Project.
An extract is given below from the Sale Deed which is made after purchase of the flat(s).
“The general common areas and facilities provided for the purchasers of flat in the estate mentioned in the Third Schedule hereto shall at all time be held by the purchaser and/or allottee member(s) along with other purchasers of flat in the said project and shall be used and enjoyed by them in common amongst themselves and neither the allottee/occupier nor any other purchaser of any flat in the aforesaid estate shall any time be entitled on any ground whatsoever to make partition or division thereof or to claim to have exclusive right in any manner whatsoever to any portion of such general common areas and facilities/amenities and that the purchaser along with the other purchasers of different flats in the aforesaid estate shall use the said general common areas and facilities/amenities for the purpose for which they are entitled to without hindering or encroaching upon the lawful rights of other purchasers and occupiers of other flats in the said Project.”
The Society has built the following in the free space of the General Common Areas.
1. Cycle/Two-Wheeler Stand – 1 no.
2. Flagpole base with sophisticated fence – 1 no.
The Society discussed regarding the Cycle Stand in several Annual General Body Meetings and the member(s) were agreed to violate the mandatory provision(s) of the Sale Deed whole-heartedly.
An extract from the minutes of 80th Board Meeting of the held on 30-08-2009 is given below:
“…iv) Intimation to W.B. Housing Board
- has already been completed”
The Society intimated to the Board prior to the construction of the Cycle/Two-Wheeler Stand.
The Board, being a party of the Sale Deed, a seller, has helped the Society to violate the mandatory provision(s) of the Sale Deed. The Board did not try to protect my right as I have paid money to them for the said flat as well as the General Common Areas in the Project.
The DRCS (Former ARCS) and the CI, Serampore has put their unauthorised interference by giving permission for construction Cycle Stand in the General Common Areas of the Project. Neither the DRCS nor the CI has spent any money for the said Flat as well as the General Common Areas of the Project nor the said property is their ancestral property.
On 29-12-2009 under ref. Memo No. 2153 M I – 3336 the ARCS issued a letter addressed to the Society as follows:
“...this office of the undersigned is not in a position to accord any sort of permission in this respect right now, because, out of 450 no of existing members of your society (having 540 no. of flats), the no of members likely to be benefitted from the proposed cycle stand is not duly furnished (more precisely, the capacity of the proposed cycle stand is not mentioned).
Now, you are hereby requested to need-ful for submission of this related documents in this regard for further course of action from this end.”
On 30-12-2009 the Society received letter from the ARCS and on the same day under ref. BIDI/Cycle stand in para 4 the Society replied to the ARCS through the CI as follows:
“ 4. Now about the capacity of the proposed stand we may say that the capacity of the stand depends upon the way the cycles are placed. The area of the proposed cycle stand is 110 ft x 8 ft. Our estimate is that around 200 cycles can be placed in the proposed cycle stand.”
Out of the above, the rest which the Secretary of the Society had written in his letter almost was not as per the requirement to the letter of the ARCS. It was a story which the Secretary of the Society manufactured just to influence the ARCS for obtaining sanction for the Cycle/Two-Wheeler Stand in their favour.
On 31-12-2009 under ref. Memo No. 179/09 the CI, Serampore Circle forwarded the letter of the Society along with favourable comments:
“...so that construction work for the cycle stand could be started as early as possible.”
Even she did not try to justify before writing to you whether the reply of the Secretary of Bidisha was in line of your letter.
On 04-01-2010 under ref. Memo No. 21 I – 3336 the ARCS issued a letter addressed to the secretary of the Society with an open permission for construction of cycle stand and the ARCS wrote as follows:
“...you may construct the Cycle Stand provided all the members (and their family) of your society can get the benefit of it irrespective of caste, creed, colour and sex for registering peace and tranquillity within our society.
At the same time, you are also requested to take necessary measures for construction of one or more no. of Cycle Stand for further requirement (if any) to meet up the need as well as demand of the members (General Body) over and above the existing capacity of the proposed Cycle Stand...”
The DRCS and the CI helped the Society directly to violate the mandatory provision(s) of the Sale Deed through applying their Official Power illegally and forcefully.
After getting success from violation of the mandatory provision(s) of the Sale Deed the Society has built one Flagpole base with sophisticated fence in the free space of the Project without any intimation to the concerned.
In the main Site Plan there is no any provision for any type Construction like Cycle/Two-Wheeler Stand and/or Flagpole Base in the free space of General Common Areas of the Project.
There as numbers of unsold flats in the Project which the Board will sale in coming days to his customers where an illegal Cycle Stand and/or a Flagpole base exist.
The aforesaid Cycle/Two-Wheeler Stand will create a serious social problem in the Project. The privacy of family members, especially lady members, of the unsold flats which are attached to Cycle/Two-Wheeler Stand will become completely destroyed. Round the clock all people will move besides their windows. It is impossible to give guarantee that no one will peep through the windows (bedroom/bathroom/kitchen/dining room) of the said flats. They should also have right to use and enjoy the sufficient free space besides their windows like other allottee member(s).
In the Sale Deed the Purchaser is the Society and I am a confirming party.
How should I be able to recover the free space?
raghavendra
07 April 2011 at 16:12
sir,
i was central government employee , i was dismissed by my employer by imposing false charge of misconduct , despite that employer lodged false criminal case against me , how ever i aquited in that criminal case , now i want to file criminal case against indian airlines that "maliciaous procecution " cae i logde civil suit against my employer by claiming damages
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 16:07
My mother has purposely involved the secretary and a committee member of the society for settlement, when the MOU is already signed. This committee member has said that the society is not bound to issue 2 share certificates in lieu of 1, even if there is a court order to that effect.
I would like to know :
- whether the society can overrule the court order and deny to issue 2 sh certificates?
- if the society does not issue 2 share certificates inspite of court order, what is the remedy available to me.
- whether the society can charge transfer fees in the said case?
I would be grateful if you could help me in the matter.
Rgds,
Anand.
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 15:56
The following sections of the LA Act,1894 refer to some registrable instrument(award?):
"51. Exemption from stamp duty and fees. - No award or agreement made under this Act shall be chargeable with stamp duty, and no person claiming under any such award or agreement shall be liable to pay any fee for a copy of the same.
[51A. Acceptance of certified copy as evidence. - In any proceeding under this Act, a certified copy of a document registered under the Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), including a copy given under section 57 of that Act, may be accepted as evidence of the transaction recorded in such document]".
Do these 2 paragraphs of LA Act,1894 mean
1. That an award or agreement made under this Act is registrable but not chargeable with stamp duty.
2. Person claiming under any such award or agreement shall be liable to pay any fee for a copy of the same obtainable from the Registrar.
3. In any proceeding under this Act, a certified copy of a document registered (by the acquiring LAO/Government) under the Registration Act,1908, including a copy given by the Registrar under section 57 of that Act, may be accepted as evidence of transaction recoded in such document.
4. The two paragraphs definitely refer to the registration of an instrument/ by the LAO in the LA process. What is that document?
or what are those documents?
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 15:51
Respected Sir/madam
I mr Mrunal Nagpure son of Madhukar Nagpure Attended the meeting on sunday(30-05-10)in absence of him also my mother and brother attended the same.
since we already have dispute in our building since 95-till today and we are the oldest member in the society since 1990. Me myself and my family members are aware of all issues in building.
since in sundays meeting we had some argument with management commitee and other memebers. Whereas the meeting was regarding redevelopment.
The secretary (mr.manohar sinh) is forcing to accept the builder which he has selected not the society as whole.
Being the old member i have informed them abt all issues happened since 1995.still they dont believe us.
now the mangaement commitee says we (myself,mother and my brother) cannot attend the meeting with or without my father(m.d.nagpure) because we misbehaved as informed by committee.
I WHAT TO KNW HOW ALL MY FAMILY MEMBERS CAN ATTEND ANY MEETING BECAUSE MY MOM AND DAD ARE NOT SO WELL EDUCATED,SO IT IS SOMETIME DIFFCULT FOR THEM TO UNDERSTAND CERTAIN THINGS.
ALSO COMMITTEE HAS ISSUED WARNING LETTER AGAINST(myself,mother and my brother). WHT TO DO
COMMITEE ALSO WANT TO MAKE THE RULLE THAT ANYONE ABOVE 35 YRS WIL ONLY ATTEND THE MEETING(IS IT VALID BYLAWS)
CAN A NON FLAT OWNER, DO A COMPLETE AGAINST COMMITEE IN MHADA.
PLZ DO REPLY AND GUIDE ME FOR THE SAME.....
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 15:49
Respected Sir/madam
I mr Mrunal Nagpure son of Madhukar Nagpure Attended the meeting on sunday(30-05-10)in absence of him also my mother and brother attended the same.
since we already have dispute in our building since 95-till today and we are the oldest member in the society since 1990. Me myself and my family members are aware of all issues in building.
since in sundays meeting we had some argument with management commitee and other memebers. Whereas the meeting was regarding redevelopment.
The secretary (mr.manohar sinh) is forcing to accept the builder which he has selected not the society as whole.
Being the old member i have informed them abt all issues happened since 1995.still they dont believe us.
now the mangaement commitee says we (myself,mother and my brother) cannot attend the meeting with or without my father(m.d.nagpure) because we misbehaved as informed by committee.
I WHAT TO KNW HOW ALL MY FAMILY MEMBERS CAN ATTEND ANY MEETING BECAUSE MY MOM AND DAD ARE NOT SO WELL EDUCATED,SO IT IS SOMETIME DIFFCULT FOR THEM TO UNDERSTAND CERTAIN THINGS.
ALSO COMMITTEE HAS ISSUED WARNING LETTER AGAINST(myself,mother and my brother). WHT TO DO
COMMITEE ALSO WANT TO MAKE THE RULLE THAT ANYONE ABOVE 35 YRS WIL ONLY ATTEND THE MEETING(IS IT VALID BYLAWS)
CAN A NON FLAT OWNER, DO A COMPLETE AGAINST COMMITEE IN MHADA.
PLZ DO REPLY AND GUIDE ME FOR THE SAME.....
Anonymous
07 April 2011 at 15:29
Dear Experts Of the forum,
Please tell me who should i approach or what should
i do, in spite of my letter to the Registrar and
copy to the Sub-Registrar (of Registrations) of the
fact of the death (Enclosed original death
certificate, issued by the authorities ) of VENDEE
in a POWER OF ATTORNY;still the registrations are
being done using this POA?
Thanking you ALL, Expecting an urgent reply please.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Property
Late husband gave life interest in the property in which our home is (1.2 acres).Also gave life interest share in plantation property together with our sons.
During course of widowhood, this property had increased by 50 pct in acreage from the profits of the firm.
In 1986 the plantation property was divided into two new firms, sharing the property between two sets of sons & myself.
I gave up my share in one division and in lieu was given 1/3 share in the second division.New firm was registered & all property documents put in the names of the 3 partners including myself.
Post division the new firm that I was part of has bought from the profits of this new firm, another 20 pct property in acreage.
Now I want to provide for my married daughters.
My question is whether in 1986 the life interest part left to me by my late husband changed into absolute interest with the formation of the new firm.
And that now I can Will my 1/3 share in the present firm to my daughters, not in the form of property but in monetary terms based on value of the property on the date of my demise, payable by the continuing partners over say a 5 year period with simple interest on the outstanding .
My fellow partners, my sons, say I cannot do so and the entire property comes to them after my demise as it evolved from the life interest given by my husband to me.
I am old now and want to settle this matter at the earliest.