Sudhin2218
23 August 2017 at 10:05
Hello All
We have a property of 100X40 residential site. it was originally purchased by my grandmother and father jointly in the year 1948. In the year 1991 my father passed away his undivided share devolved to me, my mother and my 3 sisters. Though there was no partition my grandmother sold her half share of the property to stranger. Stranger has filed a partition suit which is currently pending before the court.
In addition to that my grandmother filed an another case in 2007, asking a relief of partition 7/12th of the schedule A property (she has right of half share (schedule B) of schedule A property and also 1 share in my father's share property(schedule C)) and put Stranger in possession schedule B property (which was sold by my grandmother) . In the plaint copy Schedule explained as below.
Schedule A: 100 X 40 site (entire property)
Schedule B: 50 X40 site (My grandmother's share of A schedule property, which was sold to stranger)
Schedule C: 50 X 40 site ( My father's share of A schedule property)
Since was not in town, we didn't contested the case properly. there was preliminary decree judgement came in partially favor of my grandmother as below.
My Grand mother is entitled for 7/12th Schedule Properties.
Schedule B property cannot be allotted to stranger, as Property was sold before the partition.
We were not aware of this judgement. Now after the death of my Gramdmother, Now Plaintiff filed a case (in year 2017) for Final decree proceeding based on "My Grand mother is entitled for 7/12th Schedule Properties." preliminary decree. Now we got to know about this judgement,
My Question is:
I read the entire Judgement. In the Judgement Summary, Hon'ble Judge has clearly mentioned that they are decreeing suit excluding schedule B property and my grandmother is entitled for 1/6th share in father's share (schedule C property).
However in the decree it has mentioned has "My Grand mother is entitled for 7/12th Schedule Properties"
Instead of mentioning only 1/6th share of schedule C property. where it mentioned as schedule properties , which includes schedule A, Schedule B and Schedule C. which is a huge error committed by Judge.
Plaintiff has also wrongly pleaded the total share of the A schedule Property. Because of the following reason.
A schedule property (100X40) was jointly purchased by Plaintiff My grand mother and My father, Both entitled for half share of Schedule A property. Further on the death of My father (year 1991), It is the contention of plaintiff being the mother of My father she also entitled of 1/6th share along with defendant 1to5 (wife and children’s of My father) in my father’s half share of Schedule A property.
Now If we look the number of shares in the schedule A property. One Half share of Plaintiff My grand mother (Schedule B, which already sold to Stranger) and total 6 shares in Father's share.
However Plaintiff filed original suit to carve out of 7/12 shares.
Total number of shares cannot be 12 at all.
Since this decree is in favor plaintiff. there are very much silent about this preliminary decree mistake. Plaintiff has file for Final decree case based on this faulty decree.
How this preliminary decree can be corrected now during Final decree proceedings? As time has already barred to appeal against preliminary decree.
Looking for your Valuable advise, Thanks.
Anonymous
23 August 2017 at 08:19
respected sirs/madams
1. I joined through at GP of 4600 in October 2012. Intimated my current department regarding my application for another GP 4600 post and got NOC for the same.
2. In 2013 i got my first increment in first department and in 2014, i tendered my technical resignation to join the second 4600 GP after 1.5 years in april 2014. in the relieving letter i got pay protection from my first department.
3. in july 2014, i got my pay fixed in the 2nd department. Here i stayed for 2.5 years. and technically resigned to join the third dept after obtaining necessary approvals.
4. since last 1 yr my pay is not fixed after giving many representations. now 3rd dept claims that as i stayed in first dept for 1.5 , pay protection by 2nd dept is wrong. though i was getting protected salary in 2.5 yrs (minus 3 months i.e april to july 2014, due to no pay protection order and service book transfer issues from first dept to second dept)
Anonymous
23 August 2017 at 08:12
Hi
I recently booked a car in Mumbai and had taken a car loan which got disbursed and the car got registered in my name.I was waiting for the delivery but I found that the Car dealer has assigned me an car which was 9 months old.As per his verbal commitment and as per industry standards car should be around 90 days manufactured date.Now I feel cheated and I don't want to take the delivery of the old car..After paying in full why should i settle for a 9 month old car.Can i walk out from this deal ?I want to understand legal view whether can I cancel the deal and its impact
balaji r
23 August 2017 at 07:20
Is it correct to register a Residential Welfare Association by the owners before handing over of flats by the builders? Whether it has legal entity? Whether payments, if made for the purchases of Lifts, Glazing materials etc. can be routed through the Residential Welfare Association Account on
account of introduction of GST if we get GSTN No.? please clarify.
Sidhartha Prakash
23 August 2017 at 06:20
I had bought a property on lease forever in 1990.
Can i execute a sale deed now? Do i have the right to sell it? Or i can execute only a lease deed.
Can i execute a sale deed in favour of any person other than the lessor?
Or i will have to give it back to the lessor only.
LalbhiShaik
23 August 2017 at 05:44
My caste is dudekula but my initial is shaik is there any problem with my initial where i applied for the jobs under obc???
Mohammed Rizwan Shaikh
23 August 2017 at 02:58
Respected Experts,
The Legal Heirs of the deceased (Muslim) have filed Testamentary Petition for the Letter for Administration in the High Court of Bombay. The Legal Heirs did not include the wife and widow of the said deceased in the Testamentary. Petition. The Legal Heir suppressed the true facts before the Honble High Court. The deceased holds several properties in Mumbai wherein in the said petition they even suppressed the same. They just included only two properties excluding the Court matters which were filed in respect to various lands in Mumbai. The legal heirs were well aware that out the 2 properties which have been mentioned in the Schedule of the Property, one property has already been gifted to the widow several years back. In the said petition, they legal heir claimed to be the next of the kin whereas the truth is that the deceased disliked/ disowned them when he was alive. Several complaints have been filed with the Government Authorities against the legal heirs by the deceased. The wife/widow of the deceased wants to intervene in the said Testamentary Petition by filing Caveat and Affidavit in Support of Caveat to claim her rights in the share of the deceased which has been suppressed by the legal heirs.
Question:
1. After filing of the Caveat and Affidavit in Support, what relief can be claimed by the Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction Court?
2.Can the widow seek stay over the property which has already been gifted by the deceased?
3.Can the widow file Partition Suit to claim her share in the properties left by the deceased?
4. What will be the outcome of the Testamentary Petition or the Suit?
5. As the legal heirs have suppressed the true facts and lied before the High Court, what action can be taken by the widow and by the Court?
EXPERTS !!! Your advice in this regard, shall be very very high appreciated
Regards,
Mohammed Shaikh
mukesh
22 August 2017 at 21:51
In Gujarat a ' District level Grievances readdress and task force committee' formed by state government to curb illegal mining activities.Most class 1 officer of various department are members. They all have duty to help stopping illegal mining activity. In july last week RTO officer caught more than 25 sand trucks. It is his duty to inform this to district geology department where 40 to 50 thousand rupees penalty may be imposed to every truck. RTO didn't do his duty and not informed district geology department.Instead he imposed only overload penalty and release trucks.All this matter on record. RTO knowingly save truck owners from heavy penalty and thus made huge loss to govt. No one bothers. I made a complain under ipc 217. About 15 days passed police hasn't registered FIR . Police guide me to file RTI to RTO and collect more info. What should i do ???
Read more at: http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/ask_query.asp
Sunil Chaudhary
22 August 2017 at 19:49
Dear All Experts I need your help & Guidance regarding a Query
I was Ex-Director of a Pt. Ltd Company and during ongoing operations of the Company we 4 Directors were taking care of running the Business on behalf of promoters who were based in London. We 4 Directors were on Wages to take care of operations of the business and our salary is due for the last 1 year and so for employees, payments to suppliers, dues for tax departments etc.,
Since last year there were disputes among promoters and the financial aid to the company was stopped and company started struggling for the business due to non-availability of funds . Due to pressure of Suppliers and to somehow keep on business running we have issued Cheques to "Operational Creditors" as PDC's to repay their payment but we cudn't repay due to non-availability of funds / non-support from promoters based out at london. One fine day the employees did strike at our company and forcefully closed the operation and we 4 directors have to face consequences and police case against us.
Meanwhile one of the Operation creditor / supplier filed I&B 2016 at NCLT Ahmadabad against our Company in April 2017. "Operational Creditor" had made petition under NCLT Ahmadabad against our Company for Insolvency & Bankruptcy for which we received the Order Copy on 10th April, 2017 from NCLT. The IRP - Interim Resolution Professional was appointed and the public notice was issued in newspapers for all the operational & Financial creditors to submit their claims on or before 3rd May, 2017.
Suddenly, as the Liquidation process is on for the Company and the IRP is involved in valuating the assets of our company and recovering due payments form our clients, few of the Operational creditors have started filing 138 for Cheque bounces against us through Negotiable Instrument Act in individual names of Directors or against the one who signed the cheques (minimum 2 Signatories). I personally have 9 cases as of now of 138 against me within a span of 1 month time now...
Request you to kindly help me to overcome the situation because i do not have individual capacity to pay for the cheques which are bounced as i myself have not received my own Salary for the last 13 months of my job. .
We did not had other options but to accept the order from NCLT becuase non of the directors had capacity to pay. The order depicts "MORATORIUM" Period until the IRP comes with final resolution in our case or until 180 days. But this 138 cases against us are harassment to us.and we are unable to understand why Operationa Creditors are doing so, becuase on one hand they have raised their claim and on the other hand they are doing 138 cases against us. What would happen once they get their payment after liquidation of our company, do they want dual payments i.e. one from Liquidation process and other from us ??
We are completely in soop because we are dealing with such 138 cases individually and this seems unstoppable with such increasing numbers. Is there any way out to deal such dual consequences. Can we apply "Moratorium" against 138 cases in NCLT or can file petition in NCLT for the negotiable instrument act or any other way out to deal such situation.
Kindly guide and suggest remedy please !!
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Request to guide how to move service matter case in cgit
Sir,
Due to failure in conciliation proceedings my grievance has been referred to Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal by Conciliation Officer. During first hearing date I have submitted my statement of claims, but no one came from Management side for the first court hearing.
Sir, kindly guide me;
(i) In the event of non attendnace from Management side in the first hearing, Will CGIT send Notice along with my statement of claims to the Management?
(ii) Is in the second hearing, Management submit its counter claim ?
(iii) What is the step by step procedure in the CGI (like submisison of statement of claims, counter claims, rejoinder, workman evidence etc.) and how much time will be given in between in each step
Kindly guide me.