PRASHANT
07 June 2015 at 19:00
Respected all experts,
I am also an advocate practicing in Criminal and taxation matters.
Crust of my problem is that a partnership firm K.L.B. consist of my father and my late grandfather filed a civil suit in near about 1965 for recovery of sum amount due from respondent. Thereafter K.L.B. obtained decree against respondent.
Now there was a notice from honorable High court of Allahabad regarding death of lawyer of K.L.B. and in that notice there was instruction to appear, on next date , through another advocate or appear in person to carry on the proceedings of the case.
I want to know if K.L.B. don’t want to contest or not appoint another advocate then:
1.What will be outcome of the case on next date fixed for appearance in the case, if K.L.B. is not present either through its new advocate or through their one only surviving partner:
2.Whether suit will ex-party against K.L.B.
3.Whether there will be any other disadvantage to K.L.B.
4.Whther respondent will be able to got decree against K.L.B.
Please , its my humble request to all experts here to give me right advise so that I can be able to reach right decision.
Advocate Parshant Kumar Agarwal
noor
07 June 2015 at 16:20
my mother was not entered in any agreement before die. but some person forged the signature of my mother and executed a gpa and sale half of the property.i want to canceelled the gpa for which how much i have to pay court fee
SANJAY JOSHI
07 June 2015 at 14:43
Dear Experts,
i wish to know about a real life doubt which i have come across in relation to property to be handed over to me by my father:
Q1 - when the immovable property is bequeathed to me in the WILL by my father, what would be the status of the property as far as i am concerned..Will such property which i will get be called as Ancestral property or the property i have acquired during my life time?
Q2 - Whether i will have right to bequeath it to my successors or my brother or sister as per my wish or It will get devolved to
my only son as per the Act as my successor?
Q3 - If the same property instead of bequeathing on me through the WILL, is transferred to me by way of GIFT as per the Act, then after getting it, will it be called as property gained by me or still it will be called as an ancestral property. Whether i have right to give such property to any other person of my choice in addition to my own son or not?
thanking you
n v subba rao
07 June 2015 at 08:19
Hi,
We obtained a decree, ex-parte, for around Rs.3 crores...I have the following questions regarding EP:
1) Can we have both movable and immovable properties in one EP?
2) What will happen to the attached properties in EP, if JD goes for (successful) appeal or set aside petition? Can the JD dispose the attached properties after this?
3) JD has one proprietary/partnership firm under which there are some courier franchises. How do we include this into EP? That is, can we include the income or just offices or the franchises (which may be at the discretion of the courier) or all ?
4)In general, how long it takes for the EP to complete?
Also appreciate if you could point to the sample EP.
Thanks in advance..
arvind
07 June 2015 at 00:34
dear i have a land in mandya district karnataka. and there was a dispute pending at the high court of karnataka since 2002. on 2012 parties and myself enter into compromise by the high court of karnataka. on june 26 2014 i give a request for rtc in my name for my portion of land as per high court of karnataka compromise petition. after that the compromise party come to taluk office give a objection on 26 june 2014. the say that as per the court order not to do rtc in my name. and again i approach the high court of karnataka for rtc. since the dispute is closed now they have approach the assistant commissioner of revenue court and have take stay.now i want know whether can i file a contempt of court. against the compromise party.
sandeep rane
06 June 2015 at 21:23
Whether Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Act 1976 is a special or local law ?
this is a preliminary of the act
CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY 1. (1) This Act may be called the Maharashtra Housing and Area Develop-ment Act, 1976. (2) 2[Chapter VII and Chapter VIII-A extend] only to 3D3rihan Mumbail, and the rest of the Act extends to the whole State of Maharashtra including 2(Brihan Mumbail. (3) This Act shall come into force in such area, from such date*, as the State Government may by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint ; and different dates may be appointed for different provisions of this Act for different areas. (4)5[ *]
7[1A. It is hereby declared that this Act is for giving effect to the policy of the State towards securing the principle specified in clause (b) of article 39 of the Constitution of India and the execution of the proposals, plans or projects there-for and the acquisition therefor of the lands and buildings and transferring the lands, buildings or tenements therein to the needy persons and the co-operative societies of occupiers of such lands or buildings.]
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Section 14 of limitation act
Ramesh sold his land measuring 200 square yards for Rs. 2,00,000/- and handed over the possession of the same to Sarjesh in the year 1990. In the year 1991, Sarjesh sold his land to ABC Co. for a sum of Rs. 2,10,000/-. On 2.3.1992, one of the sons of Ramesh, who had attained majority in the year 1991, filed a suit for recovery of possession of the land against ABC Co. on the ground that the land in issue was a joint Hindu Family property and thus Ramesh could not have sold the land to Sarjesh as the transaction was neither for a legal necessity nor in the interests of the Joint Hindu Family. ABC Co. in its written statement inter alia raised a preliminary objection that as Sarjesh has not been made party to the suit, and the two sale deeds were not under challenge, the suit as framed was not maintainable. The suit remained pending for some time and ultimately got dismissed on the two preliminary objections raised by ABC Co. The plaintiff filed an appeal and then withdrew the same in the year 2001 with liberty to take such other legal recourse including a civil suit against the defendant as may be permissible in law. The plaintiff then in the year 2002 again filed a fresh suit for a declaration that the sale deed in favour of Sarjesh and the consequent sale deed in favour of ABC Co. were null and void and for recovery of possession of land. This time Sarjesh was made a defendant to the suit. ABC Co. filed its written statement and raised a preliminary objection that the suit was barred by time. The plaintiff relied on Section 14 of the Limitation Act and contended that the suit was within time. Can the plaintiff claim benefit of Section 14 of Limitation Act.