Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

RADHA PYARI SRIPADA   18 October 2008 at 16:46

personal appearance of parties in family courts

is it not possible to dispense with the personal appearance of the parties in family courts at every date of hearing except when the case is posted for the evidence of the respective party?

Mohamed Ali   15 October 2008 at 23:33

scope of FDP to delete lr's on record based on law

A muslim partition suit was decreed in name of 6 Sons as defendants and 5 Daughters as plaintiffs, As per decree sons are entitle for 2/17th share and daughters are entitle for 1/17th share..

While filing FDP all the original defendants and plaintiffs were dead as this a very long pending suite,

Hence all their LR's had to be brought on record to represent them in FDP.

In one 3rd plaintiff's(Died in 1978) case who is a daughter,
She had 3 children 1 son(died in 1974) and 2 daughters, Son had predeceased her mother (hence he is not entitle for share as per Mohameddan law)..

But by mistake or purpose, The predeceased sons heirs were brought on record while filing of FDP.. As per LAW they are misjoinders, As their father( is a predeceased son of 3rd plaintiff) and is not entitle for any share in the 3rd plaintiff share of property.

FDP is still pending, As per decree my great grandmother is entitle for 1/17 share, while filing of FDP they have brought on record heirs of this predeceased son as LR's (misjoinders) along with their 2 aunts,
Since FDP is to allot 1/17th share for my Great grandmother in that only two daughters of Original 3rd plaintiff are entitle for share.

Point to be noted: These predeceased son's children were brought on record, while filing of FDP in 1984, where as preliminary decree was passed in 1970, since the original 3rd plaintiff had died(in 1978) and her son died in 1974.

In muslim law birth right is not recognised(where Hindu law recognises birth right), hence question who are the LR's entitle for share in 3rd plaintiff 1/17th share will come up only after her death, Since her son had predeceased her,
Only 2 daughters of 3rd plaintiff are entitle for share not childrens of predeceased son... this is our IA.

question:
FDP is still pending, Will the court executing decree will delete these misjoinders in FDP proceedings itself, as per Rule 10(2) and sec 47. or we have to file a seperate suite after FDP...

baljit singh   15 October 2008 at 12:48

hindu minority and guradianship act.

where shall an appeal lie against the dismissal of an application u/s 8 of the hindu minority and guardianship act 1956 disposed of by the court of Civil Judge(Junior division)under the delegated powers. also quote some case law.

ARVIND JAIN   15 October 2008 at 11:20

LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP

MAHARASHTRA GOVT HAS DECIDED TO AMEND 125 CR.P.C TO INCLUDE WOMEN IN LIVI IN RELATIONSHIP.DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT HAS ALREADY PROVIDED PROTECTION TO SUCH WOMEN. NOW MY QUESTION IS CAN WE LEGALISE SUCH RELATIONSHIP AS MARRIAGE AND WHAT ARE THE COSEQUENCES OF LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP IN CASE OF LEGITIMACY, SUCCESSUION ETC ????????????????

Mohamed Ali   14 October 2008 at 21:36

Misjoinders(updated)

A muslim partition suit was decreed in name of 6 Sons as defendants and 5 Daughters as plaintiffs, As per decree sons are entitle for 2/17th share and daughters are entitle for 1/17th share..

While filing FDP all the original defendants and plaintiffs were dead as this a very long pending suite,

Hence all their LR's had to be brought on record to represent them in FDP.

In one 3rd plaintiff's(Died in 1978) case who is a daughter,
She had 3 children 1 son(died in 1974) and 2 daughters, Son had predeceased her mother (hence he is not entitle for share as per Mohameddan law)..

But by mistake or purpose, The predeceased sons heirs were brought on record while filing of FDP.. As per LAW they are misjoinders, As their father( is a predeceased son of 3rd plaintiff) and is not entitle for any share in the 3rd plaintiff share of property.

FDP is still pending, As per decree my great grandmother is entitle for 1/17 share, while filing of FDP they have brought on record heirs of this predeceased son as LR's (misjoinders) along with their 2 aunts,
Since FDP is to allot 1/17th share for my Great grandmother in that only two daughters of Original 3rd plaintiff are entitle for share.

Point to be noted: These predeceased son's children were brought on record, while filing of FDP in 1984, where as preliminary decree was passed in 1970, since the original 3rd plaintiff had died(in 1978) and her son died in 1974.

In muslim law birth right is not recognised(where Hindu law recognises birth right), hence question who are the LR's entitle for share in 3rd plaintiff 1/17th share will come up only after her death, Since her son had predeceased her,
Only 2 daughters of 3rd plaintiff are entitle for share not childrens of predeceased son... this is our IA.

question: 1) FDP is still pending, Will the court executing decree will delete these misjoinders in FDP proceedings itself, as per Rule 10(2) and sec 47. or we have to file a seperate suite after FDP...

2) In the court in which FDP is pending, our IA to remove this misjoinders is pending from past 6 months, our IA is not yet been allowed or rejected, we are frustrated due to this delay,

can we file a writ petition in High court by passing this lower court to delete this misjoinders...

Mohamed Ali   13 October 2008 at 21:28

Misjoinders

A muslim partition suit was decreed in name of 6 Sons as defendants and 5 Daughters as plaintiffs, As per decree sons are entitle for 2/17th share and daughters are entitle for 1/17th share..

While filing FDP all the original defendants and plaintiffs were dead as this a very long pending suite,

Hence all their LR's had to be brought on record to represent them in FDP.

In one 3rd plaintiff's case who is a daughter,
She had 3 children 1 son and 2 daughters, Son had predeceased her mother (hence he is not entitle for share as per Mohameddan law)..

But by mistake or purpose, The predeceased sons heirs were brought on record while filing of FDP.. As per LAW they are misjoinders, As their father(predeceased son of 3rd plaintiff) was not entitle for any share in the 3rd plaintiff Property.

FDP is still pending, As per decree my great grandmother is entitle for 1/17 share, while filing of FDP they have brought on record heirs of this predeceased son as LR's (misjoinders) along with their 2 aunts as the son(died in 1974) had predeceased, of original 3rd plaintiff, Since FDP is to allot 1/17th share for my Great grandmother in that only two daughters of Original 3rd plaintiff are entitle for share.

Point to be noted: These predeceased son's children were brought on record, while filing FDP in 1984, where as preliminary decree was passed in 1970, since the original 3rd plaintiff had died(1978) at the time,
In muslim law birth right is not recognised(where Hindu law recognises birth right), hence this issue of predeceased son will come up only after the death of Share holder ie 3rd plaintiff(1/17th share holder as per decree)

question: 1) FDP is still pending, Will the court executing decree will delete these misjoinders in FDP proceedings itself, as per Rule 10(2) and sec 47. or we have to file a seperate suite after FDP...

2) Since court in which FDP is pending is delaying on argument of our application, can we file a writ petition in High court to delete this misjoinders...

ricky   12 October 2008 at 22:29

seeking advice for will dispute

my father died 2 years ago.he left a will that says every thing he had goes only to me.we r 3 brothers.but nobody knew about this will until few days ago.7 months ago my mother@my brothers made me sign some papers that i didnt care to read.now that i came to know about this will;i told my mother&brothers.but instead they told me that i already have read that will and i have signed another will that states with my authority i transfered everything to my mothers name.but ihave no clue about doing this.iwant everything as my father,s will says.but they are not agreed with this.they are saying that i will get nothing now.pls advice me what to do?

K.C.Suresh   08 October 2008 at 05:56

Dead Marriage

Since the marriage between the parties is dead for all practical purposes and there is no chance of it being retrieved, the continuance of such marriage whether would itself amount to cruelty?

vinod bansal   05 October 2008 at 18:12

Adoption deed

Sir
is it mandatory to register a adoptioon deed i mean adoption deed is a compulsory registrable document or not? secondery is it sufficient to attested a adoption deed by a notary public.

Dr. Harrit Jani   05 October 2008 at 13:08

intrim mainantance section 125

Hello ,
Regards,
I have just studied the case study posted by of Savitri, I have a Query : What in case :(1) Husband and wife had no merital relationship from the very 4th day of marriage, (2) Wife went away with her parrents and other family members taking away allmost all the house hold, appliances, cash, and others in absence of her husband. after three years of marriage, even without informing her husband in either way. (3) The husband became the victim of heart desease and spinal cord desease as well depression under such physical condition was not able to work and earn so lost the job. (3) now still for last five years husband has no income source and totally dependant on his parrents who are again a middle class family and retired father(no pension or any other income)mother is house wife. (4) now after five years wife has filled the application for interim maintanance under 125, before that she has never been in any contact of husband in either way. As husband is not able to work and earn and not earning for last five years. what can be the solution. can honorable court order husband for the allowance or maintainance. What can be the solution and legal guidance for the husband? Please guide.