Satyendra Singh
05 February 2017 at 14:59
I have seepage in my Flat due to non maintanance of old Water Fitting Pipes of my upper flat's owner. This apartment was built by a private builder in 2005. My above flat owner is not co-operating me from 1 and half year.
Sir what to do?
samir pilankar
05 February 2017 at 14:57
We have a commercial office space with leave licence agreement with a firm for 5 years with 3 years lockin period.
There was some issue with water leakage for which the tenant is asking for unrealistic damages.
This has been replied by our lawyer .
Now we have issued 3 months notice for termination of agreement which is due to end in 3 months.
The tenant is refusing to evacuate the premises saying that his damages should be cleared.
Can the tenant continue to hold possession of premises in spite of the lockin period getting over ?
Anonymous
05 February 2017 at 14:16
I belong to a joint family consisting of my father & uncle. We are 4 brothers and our uncle has 2 sons. We have ancestral property where 3 of my brothers and uncle's family are staying. Also, there are another ancestral land where my brothers are running a hotel for the last 20 years. I am staying at a different place for my job. My father has his own property as land at this place and I am staying there. Now, there is a dispute amongst the brothers and while they are not allowing me access to the ancestral property but claiming rights over the property of my father. What are the remedies available with me to get my rights? My queries are - Do I have rights over the ancestral land on which they are running the hotel?, Do I have rights over the ancestral land on which they have constructed a building and are staying? and Do they have rights over the building at the place (property bought by my father) I am staying? Please advice.
M.M.Lal
05 February 2017 at 13:43
Dear Sir,
My maid servant has a problem. A flat in Oshiwara (Mumbai) of Maharashtra Housing Development Authority (MHADA)allotted to some slum dweller was given on a condition that the flat cannot be sold for ten years. My maid purchased the flat from the owner before the completion of ten years, by way of Agreement for Sale (Not registered). Her legal heirs had joined in the transfer and also gave an Indemnity Bond that they will be responsible if there is any loss or damage to the transferee(My maid servant). Later, the owner died. The legal heirs are ready to execute any document. Please advise whether this property can now be transferred by execution of conveyance deed and registered properly in Mumbai. What would be step by step procedure keeping in view the fact that MHADA had stipulated a ten year condition, as stated above, which was in fact violated by this transfer.
M.M.Lal
Gurdeep Singh kang
05 February 2017 at 13:16
Hello ,
a false case of 498A/406 is registered against me . In my wife statement she said she never visited in the month of april 2016 to my house, but actually she did and took all her belongings . i do not have any proof of the same. Kindly suggest me the way to get the mobile tower locations of her mobile number , or any application that i can move in the court to get the same. if the format is available kindly help me b sending the same. I have just filed the reply in my DV case. My advocate doent guide me on the same.
regards
Gurdeep Singh
samir pilankar
05 February 2017 at 13:08
We have a commercial office space with leave licence agreement with a firm for 5 years with 3 years lockin period.
There was some issue with water leakage for which the tenant is asking for unrealistic damages.
This has been replied by our lawyer .
Now we have issued 3 months notice for termination of agreement which is due to end in 3 months.
The tenant is refusing to evacuate the premises saying that his damages should be cleared.
Can the tenant continue to hold possession of premises in spite of the lockin period getting over ?
Adil
05 February 2017 at 11:47
Hello,
I would like to know if there is any exemption on providing sports related coaching services to school students?
Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.
tapan
05 February 2017 at 11:11
sir, there were two complaint filed under 138 NI act. both cases 1/2016 and 2/2016 complainat and accused are same. But when evidence were led due to mistake case no 2/2016 evidence was led in case no 1/2016 and vice versa. cross has been accordingly. at time of further statment it came on knowlege about this to complainant. I am complainant. how can now i carry further ??? can it be cured ?
K.CHELLIAH
05 February 2017 at 10:33
Wat s d parent case of this prob?
Mrs. Vandana is a professional in the Auckworks Company dealing with Computer Software. She is married to Mr. Sujay who is a lawyer by profession. She is an active blogger and often chats on the internet but one night Vandana was unable to log on to her account. Her friend, Ms. Sanjana called her up and informed her that a chat message was circulating from her account which showed a very vulgar chat of hers with an unknown guy called Mr. Shiv Sharma. Further, she informed her that she has reportedly admitted in the chat that she was having an affair with a guy called Shyam for the last two years behind the back of her husband which was sent to all her contacts and her husband’s contacts as well. The interesting factor was that the chat had been dated 3rd October 2008 while the mail has been circulated on the 5th of October 2008. Mr. Sujay was disturbed with this fact and insisted to sever all ties with Vandana, who, on the other hand, lodged a F.I.R. with the cybercrime cell of the police in Delhi on 7th December, 2008. During the course of investigation it was revealed that there was absence of any specific IP address in India as the blogger had logged through a Proxy Server in Canada. After three months, the police could not locate any person by the name Shiv Sharma, but the person called Mr. Shyam, who was a Diplomat of Kenya in India, had been traced. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs mean while issued a demarche to the Consulate of Kenya at Delhi. The police meanwhile had sealed all the electronic records of Mrs. Vandana and was treating them as evidence. The police charge sheeted Mr. Shyam on 21st July, 2009 for cyber hacking based on the electronic records of Mrs. Vandana available to them. Mrs. Vandana meanwhile broke down mentally as the lawyer she has consulted could not suggest her some proper solution. She, however, accused Shyam for defaming her by way of circulating the chat messages to everyone in her contact list. Shyam denied all the allegations including the ones made by Vandana. In statement Mr. Shyam has contended that he was a good friend of Mrs. Vandana but they were not having any affair and that they both were unaware of any Shiv Sharma. The prosecution contended that Shyam had hacked the account of Mrs. Vandana with the intention to separate Vandana from her husband and also attempted to defame her. The chat had been done through SKYPET network a Proxy Server in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). The police issued a notice for disclosure of the entire transcripts of chats as well the details of users. However, SKYPET has its headquarters in (PoK) and had refused to hand over any details regarding their users on any account. The only record which the prosecution had was the auto saved chat messages on Vandana’s computer which had been there between Vandana and Shyam, no such records were recovered from the computer confiscated from cyber cafe. In those chats it has been seen that Shyam had consistently been saying that he loves Vandana and can go to any extent to get her from the clutches of her husband. The prosecution contends that Shiv Sharma and Shyam is the same individual and Shyam had planned to break all the ties between Vandana and her husband and thus get her for himself. When the case was put forth before the court for trial, the accused contended that the electronic records provided could not be treated as evidence according to the Indian Evidence Act, 1972 and also that, a chat which had been recorded on a foreign server cannot be treated as a piece of evidence in this regard. The defence further contended that on the alleged date i.e. 3rd and 5th of October he was in the Consulate Office of Tanzania at Delhi and he had also produced a log book of the Consulate as evidence to show that he was at Consulate. Besides, the trial court concluded that the Information Technology Act, 2000 does not have any specific provision to punish a person based on the facts of the given case. The Trial Court has acquitted him from all charges completely ignoring the issue of defamation. The State has now moved in appeal before the Delhi High Court to prosecute Shyam for the offences of cyber hacking and cyber defamation, the accused pleads that the High Court does not have any jurisdiction in this case as the Cyber Tribunal has been vested with the jurisdiction to deal with these cases. Besides, the High Court cannot go back to the facts of the case and deal with merits in order to come to a judgment and the Trial Court has been right in deciding that the electronic records cannot serve as evidence. However the petitioner relied upon the doctrine of exclusive knowledge and contended that burden of proof is reversed. Therefore accused was under a liability to prove his innocence and show that he had not done any of the chats to which accused contends that the exclusive theory will not hold good in this case as he was not present during the time of the chat in contention and that he could not be made to give proof incriminating against him in this regard. The Appeal is set for hearing before Hon’ble Delhi High Court on 26th March 2011. Note: The teams are required to prepare a case from both the sides.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Company denied for Variable payment
Dear Sir,
I was employee of one organisation from Nov. 14 to Oct 16.
And I resigned organisation dated 15th Sept and served notice as per company policy with complete handover. And I got last year variable payment from company also.
My query is
Company says that you have resigned organisation then you are not eligible for variable payment.
My issue is that why I cannot get variable pay from company because it is purely based on performance.
So please let us know for any rule or provision regarding variable pay so I can fight with company.
Please suggest ASAP.
Thanks
Prakash