Anonymous
17 April 2016 at 12:38
Hello Sir
I am co-borrower for a home loan where primary borrower and third borrower exist.
Primary borrower pays the emi from his salary. The same three names are present on property. Second borrower i.e. me has not given any security to the bank. I was included on property and loan only to increase the loan eligibility of primary borrower.
My questions are as follows
1. In case primary and third borrower are unable to service the loan, can i file suite against them to sell the properties and pay bank?
2. Can i claim ownership rights of the property on the basis that my creditworthiness and financial status was used by primary and third borrower to increase their eligibility for the loan?
3. Can primary and third borrower file case against me to giveup my rights on property without considering my non monetory contribution mentioned above?
4. Do i need to make payments towards loan and create my interest in the property? Or by virtue of having my name on property i have owenership right?
Thanks
Anil
Anonymous
17 April 2016 at 11:27
Res.Sir
With the reference of the above subject, plaintiff get Injunction order from trial court, defendants preferred appeal before the Hon'ble District Court for Stay on Injunction.which is still pending. Thereafter, plaintiff move application with prayer of Grant Police aid to maintain Injunction, we has filed say with rebut the application.,but,Hon'ble court matter fix for final argument with police aid.
My question is that.
Can court grant police aid to plaintiff for maintain Injunction order while all civil remedies are available to plaintiff?if not please provide some case laws on this topic. As soon as possible. I am waiting your valuable suggestions.
Varun Mittal
16 April 2016 at 22:13
What the court fees be to file a revision u/s 25 provincial small cause court act
Gautam Dhawan
16 April 2016 at 12:53
Request the experts to clarify the following for me :
What is the limitation Period for bringing a case for damages for malicious prosecution ?
1. Will limitation period be calculated from the date of Order of Discharge by Metropolitan Magistrate ?
OR
2. Will limitation period be calculated from the date of Order of Dismissal of Revision Petition by Sessions Judge ?
There are conflicting judgments on this issue as on one side certain high courts feel that a case for malicious prosecution cannot be brought up while Revision Petition is pending
Whereas there are also judgments where suits have been dismissed taking the date of order of discharge by Metropolitan Magistrate as the date from when Limitation begins to run.
Certain Observations of the courts :
The order of acquittal terminates the prosecution for the time being. The filing of an appeal does not ipso facto vacate that order: and yet while the appeal is pending it can hardly be said that the prosecution has terminated.
In our opinion, the starting point of the limitation for a suit for compensation for malicious prosecution is the date of the operative order whereby the plaintiff has been acquitted or the prosecution against him has terminated in his favour. In a case where the order of acquittal or the order whereby the prosecution is terminated in any other manner, is not challenged in appeal or revision before the Superior Court, the limitation will have to be computed from the date of the passing of the said order. But in cases where the said order of acquittal or the order terminating the prosecution is challenged in appeal or revision before the Superior Court, by virtue of the applicability of the doctrine of merger, the original order is merged in the order that is passed by the superior Court in appeal or revision and the operative order would be the order of the superior court and therefore, the period of limitation will have to be computed from the date of the order of the Superior court in appeal or revision
anupam sharma
16 April 2016 at 07:07
I bought a flat for 15 lakh in 2015, July when the market value of the flat was approx. 40 lakh, but owing to a prior understanding with owner, the flat was agreed to be sold to be at 15 lakh vide an agreement to sell. Now a change of mind has occurred with owner and he wishes o extort more money from me despite a written agreement to sell. According to agreement I was to pay 15 lakh total through bank account (full and final) which I have already done 6 months back but the owner has not yet agreed for sale deed/mutual transfer (as the owner does not have a conveyance deed as yet).What remedies do I have as no time was stipulated in agreement for sale deed.
Lorax Michael
15 April 2016 at 22:14
IT WAS A CLUSTER CASE WHERE 8 CLASS I OFFICER AND 18 CLASS III EMPLOYEES WERE INVOLVED. ALL CLASS I OFFICER AND 13 CLASS III EMPLOYEES WERE CHARGE SHEETED AND FINALLY CENSURED. ALL CLASS I OFFICER GOT THEIR DUE PROMOTIONS ON TIME WITHOUT LOOSING A SINGLE DAY THOUGH THE CASE WAS FINALLY DECIDED FOR THEM IN 2013. HOWEVER CLASS III DID NOT GET PROMOTION UNTIL 2014.WHICH MEANT LOSS OF 2 PROMOTIONS.
THE CASE WAS REGULARISED BECAUSE THE CASE WAS NOT PRESENTED PROPERLY BY OUR LAWYER
THERE ARE 2 SETS OF RULES IN LIC REGARDING PROMOTION. FOR CLASS I UNTIL CHARGE SHEET IS ISSUED PROMOTION CANNOT BE DENIED.FOR CLASS III ANY EXPLANATION CALLED FOR DENIES PROMOTION UNTIL CASE IS FINALISED.
I WAS NEVER CHARGE SHEETED. AND I HAD REPRESENTED THIS TO APPELLATE AUTHORITY BUT ALL IN VAIN.
I GOT PROMOTION IN 2015 INA REMOTE BRANCH IN JODHPUR BUT WAS NOT ABLE TO JOIN.
WHAT ARE THE CHANCES THAT IT WILL COME OUT OF REGULAR O
Shankar Balasaheb Dhumal
15 April 2016 at 18:43
Dear all ,
A Purchased land of B . for this transaction consideration amount paid by C's on his own bank account by cheque. can c have remedy to file civil suit against A for this property ( have any merit to A ? )
Please give me answer
Regards.
Adv. Shankar Dhumal
Naresh Kumar
15 April 2016 at 15:56
Govt. passed a Resulution dated 10/10/1997 vide which Rank and pay structure of non-gazzeted combatised categories in Central Police Organisations was rationalised wef 10/10/1997. CRPF, BSF,ITBP, CISF,SSB and Assam Rifles are CPO , and said order of Govt is equally applicable on all said CPO. Based on that order Clerks, being non-gazzetted combatised category, working in Assam Rifles in the Rank and pay scale of Head Constable ( 1200-2040) sought upgradation of their rank and pay scale to ASI (1320-2040) at par with their counterparts working in sister CPO i.e. BSF/CRPF ,which was allowed by single bench of Guwahty High Court with financial benefits from 1.1.1986 but DB restricted notional benefit from 1.1.1986 and arrears from date of filing of petition i.e. 2010 and further SC modified the order of DB and allowed arrears from 1.1.1986 by affirming single bench judgement.
Based on same order of Govt dated 10/10/1997, Phamacists, being non-gazzetted combatised cadre, working in CRPF sought upgradation of their rank and pay scale at par with their counterparts working in ITBP from ASI(1320-2040) to SI(1400-2300) , filed SWP in Jand K High Court during 1998 and held that writ petitioners are held entitled same rank and pay scale at par with their counterparts working in ITBP and LPA filed by UOI is also dismissed by DB on 12.08.2015. Despite that order of Court not yet implemented. Contempt notice issued on 06/04/2016 for three weeks. Under such circumstances, I would like to request to all respected experts to kindly advise what option is available before Govt. In my opinion, UOI have to implement said order of Court since issue involved has already been decided by the Honable SC based on Govt own rationalisation of non- gazzetted cadres in CPO.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Co-borrowers rights and responsibility
Hello Sir
I am co-borrower for a home loan where primary borrower and third borrower exist.
Primary borrower pays the emi from his salary. The same three names are present on property. Second borrower i.e. me has not given any security to the bank. I was included on property and loan only to increase the loan eligibility of primary borrower.
My questions are as follows
1. In case primary and third borrower are unable to service the loan, can i file suite against them to sell the properties and pay bank?
2. Can i claim ownership rights of the property on the basis that my creditworthiness and financial status was used by primary and third borrower to increase their eligibility for the loan?
3. Can primary and third borrower file case against me to giveup my rights on property without considering my non monetory contribution mentioned above?
4. Do i need to make payments towards loan and create my interest in the property? Or by virtue of having my name on property i have owenership right?
Thanks
Anil