Amandeep Singh
24 September 2009 at 12:41
Sir,
My father got property share under arbitration award between three of the brothers including my father, but after the award got registered and became a decree and my father's brother challenged on some false grounds claiming large amount of money from us and finally in order to settle the dispute we admit to give the amount of Rs549000 on sale of our property in which we are living and he is also living with us in a room occupied by him.Now when we are ready to sell our house he is demanding 8 lacs more to vacate the property. We are at a loss to know what to do please suggest should we go to court again as the below mentioned compromise deed also written in the courts.
My father Sarvjit Singh
His brother Kuljit Singh
This Compromise Deed is executed on 18-02-2009 at Ludhiana amongst Sh.Kuljit Singh-Petitioner and the respondent No. 1 & 3.
Whereas the aforesaid objection petition is pending against the Arbitration Award dated 11-12-2007 registered on 14-12-2007 with the Sub-registrar, Ludhiana in this Hon’ble Court.The parties have arrived at Compromise and terms & conditions of the same are as under, which is part & parcel and suplementary to the said Award.
1. That the H.No. B-I-815, Ludhiana will be sold in the open market by Sh. Sarvjit Singh within 6 months from the date of getting a T.S..-1 from M.C. Ludhiana. The original time period of 6 months for selling the house will be extended for reasonable time, if any legal complication arises.
2. That none of the parties and their family members of the Arbitration Award shall have no right to purchase the said house in any manner directly or indirectly.
3. That till the sale of the said house, Sh.Kuljit Singh –petitioner has a right to stay and enjoy the said house in a husbandry manner.
4. That after paying Rs.5,49,000/-(Rupees Five Lac Forty Nine Thousand only) to Sh.Kuljit Singh-petitioner by Sh. Sarvjit Singh-respondentNo.1, rest of the consideration amount will belong to Sh. Sarvjit Singh absolutely.
5. That the said amount of Rs.5,49,000/-(Rupees Five Lac Forty Nine Thousand only) shall be paid by Sh.Sarvjit Singh-respondent No.1 to Sh.Kuljit Singh-petitioner at the time of the sale of the house out of the sale proceeds.
6. That on receipt of Rs.5,49,000/-(Rupees Five Lac Forty Nine Thousand only) ,all the claims of Sh.Kuljit Singh-petitioner in respect of the estate of deceased Sh.Gurcharan Singh,father of the objector/petitioner,shall be fully settled and nothing shall be remained due towards Sh.Sarvjit Singh and his family and Smt.Surinder Kaur- respondent No.3.
7. That the above said terms and conditions are part & parcel and suplement to the said Arbitration Award and the same is enforceable and executable along with the above said terms.
8. That each party will give his affidavit regarding no objection for the change of ownership as per the Arbitration Award.
and sir please tell what relations are covered in the term family members.The person is not allowing us to sell the property and waiting for the time to get the property auctioned. A lawyer is suggesting to file an appeal to cancel the above decree on some grounds. Can anybody suggest some solid grounds for the cancellation of the above compromise.riven
kamala
24 September 2009 at 12:23
I would like to know about the hindu succession act - whether on death of husband should the wife repay his debts
is it compulsory to produce succession certificate to the bank for changing the liability in her name
if the bank had not asked the person to pay from january 2006, whether law of limitation would apply as on january 2009riven
lovababu
24 September 2009 at 11:27
Father earns his own capacity a house property dies leaving his children and property to his wife without any will.
Can the daughter of such deceived father claim her share in that property? who is owner of such property?riven
Derek
24 September 2009 at 09:37
Detection of fraud in accounts of co-op housing society? Is it possible to have independent auditors go through the records.
If dues not paid to co-op housing society what are the required steps to be taken?riven
Rishi Ahuja
24 September 2009 at 09:28
Respected sir,
I would like to know can i file case of adultry against my wife"s friend, as i cannot file a case of adultry against my wife. If yes, then what i have to do, i have to file an complaint in Police Station or can i file the case direct in the hon'ble court. If in the PS, then which PS, the PS near to my place of residance or the PS juridiction in which the person belongs. Call/SMS records or sufficient for the evidances or any more thing , u sugesst me better. Which cAZn help me in getting sole custody of my son and for the dirvoce, which i am unwilling to give.
Thanks
Thanks.riven
PJANARDHANA REDDY
24 September 2009 at 05:14
AN IMPORTANT CASE SC CITATION ON VALIDITY OF JUDICIAL STAMP PAPER
THIRUVENGADA V NAVNEETHMAL
Writ Petition (civil) 290 of 2001
PETITIONER:
Thiruvengada Pillai
RESPONDENT:
Navaneethammal & Anr.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/02/2008
BENCH:
R. V. Raveendran & P.Sathasivam
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
R. V. RAVEENDRAN, J.
This appeal by special leave is by the plaintiff in a suit for specific
performance - OS No.290/1980 on the file of District Munsiff, Tindivanam.
Pleadings
2. In the plaint, the plaintiff (appellant) alleged that the first defendant
(Adilakshmi) agreed to sell the suit schedule property to him under an
agreement of sale dated 5.1.1980 for a consideration of Rs.3,000/-, and
received Rs.2,000/- as advance. She agreed to execute a sale deed by
receiving the balance consideration of Rs.1,000/- within three months.
Possession of the suit property was delivered to him, under the said
agreement. He issued a notice dated 14.2.1980 calling upon the first
defendant to receive the balance price and execute the sale deed. The first
defendant sent a reply denying the agreement. To avoid performing the
agreement of sale, the first defendant executed a nominal sale deed in regard
to the suit property in favour of the second defendant (first respondent
herein), who was her close relative. The said sale was neither valid nor
binding on him. On the said averments, he sought specific performance of
the agreement of sale, against the defendant, alleging that he was ready and
willing to perform his part of the contract.
3. The defendants denied the allegation that the first defendant had
executed an agreement of sale dated 5.1.1980 in favour of the plaintiff or
that she had delivered possession of the suit property to him. They
contended that plaintiff had concocted and forged the document with the
help of his henchmen to defraud the defendants. They claimed that the first
defendant had executed a valid sale deed dated 11.2.1980 in favour of the
second defendant and had delivered possession of the suit property to her;
and that the second defendant had put up a hut in the schedule property and
was actually residing therein. The second defendant raised an additional
contention that she was a bona fide purchaser for value and therefore, the
sale in her favour was valid.
4. During the pendency of the suit first defendant died, and the third
defendant (second respondent herein) was impleaded as her legal
representative, who adopted the written statement of the second defendant.
Issues and the Judgment
5. On the said pleadings, three issues were framed by the trial court : (i)
whether the agreement put forth by the plaintiff was true or concocted ? (ii)
whether the second defendant had purchased the suit property for valid
consideration ? and (iii) whether the plaintiff was entitled to the relief of
specific performance ? The plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 and the
scribe of the agreement (Ramaswami Pillai) as PW-2 and an attesting
witness to the sale agreement (Venkatesha Pillai) as PW-3. The agreement
of sale was exhibited as Ex. A-1. The notice and reply were marked as Ex.
A2 and A4. The second defendant, (purchaser of the site), gave evidence as
DW-1 and the third defendant, who was also a witness to the sale deed dated
11.2.1980, was examined as DW-2. The sale deed dated 11.2.1980 executed
by first defendant in favour of second defendant was marked as Ex.B2 and
previous title deed was exhibited as Ex. B4. The plaintiff and his witnesses
gave evidence that the sale agreement was duly executed by first defendant
in favour of plaintiff. The defendants gave evidence about the sale in favour
of second defendant and denied execution of any agreement of sale in favour
of plaintiff.
6. The trial court after appreciating the evidence, dismissed the suit by
judgment and decree dated 28.2.1984. It heriven
TANMOY
24 September 2009 at 02:20
Hi, Here is the problem for our experts-
1. A lady had taken a home as tenant and living there for last two years and handed over her ornaments to the landlord who had issued a cheque of 12 lac rs for the purpose of purchasing those ornaments. The cheque was bounced and the lady issued a notice of demand under 138 N.I. act.The landlord told the lady to vacate the house. The lady refused and went ahead with securing an interim INJUNCTION from the court of Civil Judge and a complaint before Judicial Magistrate First Class for cheque bounce.
2. The husband of that lady had issued a cheque of Rs. 1 lac to the landlord for paying rent arrears but as the landlord took a loan of Rs. Six Lac from the husband of that lady, the landlord issued a cheque of Rs. five lac to the husband of that lady AFTER DEDUCTING THE HOUSE RENT. The cheque which was issued by the husband, 1 lac rs, was bounced as well as the cheque which was issued by the landlord, 5 lac rs, was also bounced. And ofcourse, a complaint case under 138 N.I act is pending against the landlord.
NO AGREEMENT IS IN EXISTENCE IN BETWEEN THE LANDLORD AND TENANT REGARDING RENT AGREEMENT, PURCHASE OF ORNAMENTS, PAYING OF ARREAR AND THE HANDLOAN.
3. Now, the landlord is claiming before the Civil Judge that the lady is not paying rent for last two years and the cheque of 1 lac rs towards house rent was bounced and therefore, the injunction should be vacated.
IN OUR POSSESSION-
1. A CHEQUE OF 12 LAC AGAINST ORNAMENT-PURCHASHE, WHICH WAS ISSUED BY THE LANDLORD AND GOT BOUNCED.
2. A CHEQUE OF 5 LAC TOWARDS HANDLOAN.
PLEASE MIND NO AGREEMENT IS THERE EXCEPT CHEQUES.
THEY HAVE A CHEQUE OF 1 LAC RS WHICH WAS ISSUED BY THE HUSBAND OF THAT LADY AND WHICH GOT BOUNCED.
What plea could be taken in Court so that the Interim Injunction will not be vacated and perpetual injunction could be obtained?
The family does not want to stay in that home but not want to vacate it until and unless the money will be recovered.riven
rajvinder singh
23 September 2009 at 20:37
SIR PLEASE TELL IN IN APPEAL FROM STATUS QUO GRANTED BY LOWER COURT ,RESPONDENT FIND THE OLD PHOTOGRAPHS OF GALI/STREET WHICH WERE NOT SHOWN BEFORE LOWER COURT.
STATUS QUO WAS GRANTED BY THE LOWER COURT ON THE BASIS OF REPORT OF LOCAL COMMISSIONER WHICH HAS FAVOURED THE RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF.
NOW THE APPEALLANT HAS APPEALED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LOWER CIVIL COURT
SIR PLS TELL ME NOW AT THIS STABE WHEN NO EVIDENCE HAS TAKEN PLACE BEFORE LOWER COURT WHAT SHOULD I DO FOR PLACING THE PHOTOGRAPHS ON JUDICIAL FILE BEFORE APPELLATE COURT.DOES I PLACE APPLICATION UNDER THIS ORDER 41 R 27OF SIMPLY SHOW THESE SNAPS WHICH ARE IN MY FAVOUR TO THE JUDGE
riven
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Please suggest the remedy on the situation given below
Sir,
My father got property share under arbitration award between three of the brothers including my father, but after the award got registered and became a decree and my father's brother challenged on some false grounds claiming large amount of money from us and finally in order to settle the dispute we admit to give the amount of Rs549000 on sale of our property in which we are living and he is also living with us in a room occupied by him.Now when we are ready to sell our house he is demanding 8 lacs more to vacate the property. We are at a loss to know what to do please suggest should we go to court again as the below mentioned compromise deed also written in the courts.
My father Sarvjit Singh
His brother Kuljit Singh
This Compromise Deed is executed on 18-02-2009 at Ludhiana amongst Sh.Kuljit Singh-Petitioner and the respondent No. 1 & 3.
Whereas the aforesaid objection petition is pending against the Arbitration Award dated 11-12-2007 registered on 14-12-2007 with the Sub-registrar, Ludhiana in this Hon’ble Court.The parties have arrived at Compromise and terms & conditions of the same are as under, which is part & parcel and suplementary to the said Award.
1. That the H.No. B-I-815, Ludhiana will be sold in the open market by Sh. Sarvjit Singh within 6 months from the date of getting a T.S..-1 from M.C. Ludhiana. The original time period of 6 months for selling the house will be extended for reasonable time, if any legal complication arises.
2. That none of the parties and their family members of the Arbitration Award shall have no right to purchase the said house in any manner directly or indirectly.
3. That till the sale of the said house, Sh.Kuljit Singh –petitioner has a right to stay and enjoy the said house in a husbandry manner.
4. That after paying Rs.5,49,000/-(Rupees Five Lac Forty Nine Thousand only) to Sh.Kuljit Singh-petitioner by Sh. Sarvjit Singh-respondentNo.1, rest of the consideration amount will belong to Sh. Sarvjit Singh absolutely.
5. That the said amount of Rs.5,49,000/-(Rupees Five Lac Forty Nine Thousand only) shall be paid by Sh.Sarvjit Singh-respondent No.1 to Sh.Kuljit Singh-petitioner at the time of the sale of the house out of the sale proceeds.
6. That on receipt of Rs.5,49,000/-(Rupees Five Lac Forty Nine Thousand only) ,all the claims of Sh.Kuljit Singh-petitioner in respect of the estate of deceased Sh.Gurcharan Singh,father of the objector/petitioner,shall be fully settled and nothing shall be remained due towards Sh.Sarvjit Singh and his family and Smt.Surinder Kaur- respondent No.3.
7. That the above said terms and conditions are part & parcel and suplement to the said Arbitration Award and the same is enforceable and executable along with the above said terms.
8. That each party will give his affidavit regarding no objection for the change of ownership as per the Arbitration Award.
and sir please tell what relations are covered in the term family members.The person is not allowing us to sell the property and waiting for the time to get the property auctioned. A lawyer is suggesting to file an appeal to cancel the above decree on some grounds. Can anybody suggest some solid grounds for the cancellation of the above compromise.
riven