Vikky
29 May 2017 at 13:21
We have filed a RSA in high court and second party have also filed a caveat ...now they are trying to execute the will.... can't we take a temporary stay from district court under order 41 rule 5,6 during the limitation period...? How we can do it?
Please respond ASAP as it is urgent...
Aman
29 May 2017 at 02:25
A Corner 10 acres of Land was acquired for the public purpose ( for making hotel ) under section 4 in 1981 and compensation was awarded to the 5 land owners but they have taken the award under protest in 1982. Government has given the land to a Private company. A little part of the land was constructed while the rest was vacant but the M.D. of the company was died after 7 years of possesion. So the said business was stopped for many years and than a steel business man purchase the company and stopped hotel business and had taken CLU ( Change of Land Use ) in 1994 near about half of the land acquired from the back of the corner side, for a factory of Steel Rolling Mill which was run only for 4 years. Now the land is still vacant from 21 years. And even more the company Director has given 35 feet wide road as a way to an unauthorized private colony from the left side.
So, the land is not used for said purpose as written in section 4.
Only 2 land owner file a civil writ a petition in 1994. And after 6 years, when company's counsel see that only 2 of 5 owners were demanding 1.33 out 10 acres while the judgement was going towards lapsing the whole 10 acres acquistion, they made a compromise on 29 Aug 2000 -:
That ' COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES STATE THAT WITHOUT INTENDING TO CREATE ANY PRECEDENT, THEY HAVE SETTLED THE DISPUTE BY MUTUAL COMPROMISE. COMPANY'S COUNSEL STATE THAT LAND MEASURING 1.33 ACRES OUT OF 10 ACRES IN THEIR POSSESSION SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE PETITIONERS. AND THE PETITIONERS SHALL REFUND THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION ALONG WITH INTEREST @ 15 % PER ANNUM ( SIMPLE AND NOT COMPOUND ). THE HANDLING OVER OF POSSESSION AND THE PAYMENT OF MONEY SHALL BE SIMULTANEOUS. '
Actually, the petitioners land falls on the main road when the total 10 acres of land was acquired and than company was giving a asymmetrical land from the back side which is not of the petitioners. Where as the petitioners are ready to refund the payment with interest. So again owners filed a CM with COCP in 2001 for writ petition which was decided in 2012, that nothing is mention in the compromise about the land and dismissing COCP that company was ready to give the land. So the compromise is still not implemented from 2000.
So now The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 is implemented from 1.1.14. Is this act is retrospective which helps land owners to get their original land back or is it right way that petitioners will take other land instead of their own. If a map is need it will also be send, my number is 94172-52552.
Mohamedi Dehgamwala
28 May 2017 at 18:16
A tenant occupying a commercial portion in Chennai is paying 'Fair Rent' fixed by Court more than 5 years ago.Can a landlord once again approach for fresh rent as there has been no enhancement eversince ?
aisha
28 May 2017 at 16:42
Wife filed suit for specific performance against husband .Suit decreed with cost and now RSA pending in high court. Wife is also granted maintenance under d/v and 125 crpc. Now husband approached for compromise in hight court and agreed to pay one time alimony and get divorce by mutual consent. Bu he want that wife should help in allowing RSA pending in the high court. Is it necessary to allow the RSA or matter can be settled with compromise agreement as wife will not press for decree. Kindly advice ? Kindly advice alternate that wife can get cost of the suit as well.
ayesha Rauf
28 May 2017 at 12:07
Hello,
I would like to know what is the legal procedure against someone who has threatened another person by making promises of marriage for ten years. Finally when it was a meeting to see the divorce papers filed, the person is taken to a PS under false pretext and forced to go inside as there is a case of harassment filed. It was a very shocking incident and I would like to know if there is any legal recourse.
devendra
27 May 2017 at 23:27
Sir I want to know that can I transfer my case from firozabzd court to Ahmedabad court.
Matter is that I log complaint against chain snacking which is happened in train journey from Lucknow to ankleswar.
Richa Sinha
27 May 2017 at 15:49
Sir, Can anyone of the experts guide me. We around 200 families purchased freehold land from developer. Registry and mutation also done. As per Tehsil letter from SDM ghaziabad, the plots for khesra no 1699 and 1700 are residential. As per RTI filed to GDA it doesn't comes under acquisition. Also there website information doesn't says the said khesra no is unauthorized. Once we made homes and some of them started living. On 9/05 /2017 GDA came without information and notice and demolished our above 50 homes . They also didn't leave the cows and their calves. that published in several news papers as well. We contacted DM, VC of GDA, police station , CM sir with our grievance letter. But nothing happened till now.our lives is in danger. Since we purchased the plots and made house with our hard earned money. GDA saying that Arthla location at Indirapurm comes under Manoranjan area. That the reason we cannot make homes there. But this information is not in there website. If our khesra no comes under Manoranjan area. We are in a difficult situation what to do now. Pleaseee Help and guide.
Anonymous
27 May 2017 at 14:08
Hi respected panel, I am Irshad from Jaipur and my query is related to N.I act sec 138 of check bouncing. I had taken a Personal loan from Tata Capital on Nov'15 whose EMIs have started from Jan'16 I have paid 6 EMIs however, after that I was unable to continue with the EMIs and have not paid 10 of them. Now, I have received multiple calls from the collection department of Tata capital and I promise to continue paying the same but yesterday I got a WhatsApp image of the BAILABLE WARRANT issued against me at my Gurgaon's address where I used to live a year back, now I live at my permanent address in Jaipur. The issuance date is 26/5/2017 and the date to appear in court is 26/9/2017.
I spoke with the collection manager and he said that the warrant is not yet served to you and if you pay 2 EMIs every month till September, we will not let the warrant serve to you and it will be nullified with no value of it and will not ask court to issue a fresh warrant.
I paid my 4 EMIs together and will pay a single EMI now onwards. My questions are as below:
1. Is collection manager is true that if they do not serve the warrant it would not have any value and they will not ask court to issue a fresh one if I pay my EMI every month?
2. Is this warrant makes me a criminal and am will it be recorded as a crime in police and government records?
3. Do I need to visit court to get bail for this warrant? It is written to pay 1000 as a bail amount before 26/9/2017. But the warrant is not yet served to me and I just have a pic of it.
4. What would be the future coarse of action I should take to nullify and void this case against me?
Kindly answer point by point.
Thanks
Rishi Gupta
26 May 2017 at 22:07
Dear Sirs,
Understand that the High Court Judgements are available for public and one can download and use as "certified copy" since the downloaded one comes with the emblem of Ashok Chakra so that people need not apply for certified copy to the High Court.
I wish to down load the Judgement of Bihari Lal Jalan Vs DDA given by the High Court. The Judgement was delivered on 20th February 2003 against the writ petitions of High Court of Delhi, Civil Writ Appeal No. 2034 of 1992, 3678 of 1992, 3343 of 1993, 3849 of 1997, 2253 of 2001.
Can some one quide me how to download from the website of Delhi High Court and use the same.
With best regards,
Rishi Gupta.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Deed of release
Dear All, I like to know that whether a house property which was purchase by (say for e.g.) Mr. X (Purchaser) from Mr Y (Vendor) and the consideration for the same is made by Mr X through Demand Drafts in favour of the Vendor (Mr Y) and the Deed of Registration for transfer of title was executed between Mr X and Mr Y in the year 1985.
However, after two month in the year 1985 itself Mr X (the purchaser) had entered into a convayance namely "DEED OF RELEASE" where he had released the said house property as mentioned earlier in the name of Mrs Z who has no family relation with Mr X (Purchaser) nor her name was mentioned anywhere in the Title Deed as Co-owner or an interested party in the puchase deed of transfered House property. Further, in the "DEED OF RELEASE" it is mentioned that the Releasor i.e. Mr X (Purchaser) is only a Benamidar and the consideration for Purchase of the House Property was provided by Mrs Z (Releasee, who is not a relative of Mr X and even the religion of Mr X is Hinduism and Mrs Z is Islam and no where in the Purchase deed between Mr. X and Mr Y any disclosure has been made that the property was purchased by Mr X from the money provided by Mrs Z).
Now my questions are as follows:-
Q1) Whether transfer of title can be made by executing "DEED OF RELEASE" where a property was purchased in the name of Benamidar?
Q2) Whether Mr X in the given case will be considered as Benamidar where no such mentioning is there in the Deed of Transfer of title between Mr. X and Mr Y (Vendor)?
Q3) Whether through "DEED OF RELEASE" one can release the right in the property in favour of a person who is neither his relative nor the Co-owner of the property?
Note: Please answer the above question by taking into consideration Benami Property Transactions Act of 1988 and kindly substantiate your answer with referance of relevant case laws.