Adv M.D.Azhar
14 February 2015 at 13:02
sir, In one case original owner A has given the P.O.A. to B to deal with the property or given all the rights which he had. Now P.O.A. has sold this property by way of agreement to sell to C and also deliver the possession to him. Now what A has done is that, It is in the knowledge of him that the said property is sold by way of agreement to C by B. So because the C was not the original owner on record so A sold out the said property to D with the malafiede intention and also to remove him from the possession of the land. Now C also file a suit before the civil court for praying that, defendant means D will not interfere in my possession but because of the error in the suit court has rejected his application for injunction. Because no prayer of specific performance was there. And the suit which was filed by the D for protection of the possession against D is granted. Now the suit which is filed By the D also seems defective because the prayer which is made in the suit is not for the deceleration, moreover relief of injunction application and suit is same so because the injunction relief is granted it's amount to grant whole suit. as held by the Hon'ble S.C. Now I want to urge before all experts that this is just done because one of the advocate guided to the all parties to do so and cheated with the C and B. so they left him, he intentionally filed a defective suit before the court because he wanted to ascertain the money form the all parties. Now matter is before me. I want to challenge both the order so i need to know that except certain merit is there another lawful grounds which i can plead in my memo such as agreement to sell which is notarized is also same value as the registered sale deed has. Another vital issue is that though registered sale deed is made the name of the D is not mutated in the revenue record. So sir please guide me and also help me and my client he want to take an action against the previous advocate so what he can do?
Adv M.D.Azhar
14 February 2015 at 11:25
sir, if the notice is served upon the women, (Mother) of the opponent in case of sec- 125(3) of the C.R.P.C. than It is amount to served or not?
Because mother of the opponent said to the police officer that my son is not here yet he throw the notice in the house and made false signature of the mother on summons. What remedy i have now?
Anubhav
14 February 2015 at 11:19
Namaskar to all experts,
Sir,
my father have a rented office space since past 35 years.he had a rent agreement with the owner of the building since he took it for rent.
The owner has sold the entire premises to my fathers brother(my uncle) some 5-6 years ago and has verbally asked my dad to pay the rent to my uncle.Since then my uncle gives us a bill(5% increment yearly) and dad pay him the advance yearly rent with cheque.
However there is no such rent agreement between my dad and my uncle.moreover the electricity bill of entire building still comes in the name of the original owner.
1.As a tenanent what should i do to be safe in terms of my ownership?
2.will the absence of Rent Agreement be a disadvantage for my dad?
3.neither original owner nor my uncle gives us a copy of their sale deed for our reference?
Sundram N
14 February 2015 at 11:16
Dear Sir(s),
498a case is under discharge petition filed by me before the lower court. i am in provisional bail garnted by High Court.
Wife side is influencing my children to call me in several time in office landline and on my mobile and abusing me and family members. i recorded in mobile.
My childrens' future is in dark as wife side is misutlising them. i demanded custody on condition to bear all expences of children but wifeside refused and demanded huge maitenance money pm under filling of case 125.
pls suggest what to do to stop such call ?
can i file case for child custody as my children are saying always to come in my home if wife is taken back. i do not want to take back such wife who falsly implicated me and family members.
pls suggest what legal action can be taken immediately on wifeside ?
Theresa Margaret Dsouza
14 February 2015 at 11:03
Good Morning,
My daughters were born in Dubai year 2000 and 2001 resp.We came back to India for good in 2005 and daughters were studying in India thereafter. Today, after 10 years I want to apply for Domicile certificate for them. Can they get it as they were born in Dubai and if yes, what is the procedure.
Appreciate your valuable advise.
Thanks
mala
14 February 2015 at 09:51
The case against accused A3 is that
1. he alongwith A1 C. A1 met Sh. R. Venkatraman and complainant on 05.02.2009 in the (R VENKATARAMAN ADVOCATE REGN NO D 205/1996 R/O 305 MEDIA APARTMENTS ABHAY KHAND IV INDIRAPURAM MOB 9910090030) itself and there a demand of Rs.75,000/was raised for early listing of the matter.
2. The further case of the prosecution is that A1 C. A1, A3 A3, A2 KM Singh and Sh. R. Venkatraman visited the complainant on 06.02.2009 at Jantar Mantar and again raised a demand of Rs.75,000/ for showing favour to the complainant relating to the listing of the case.
3. Thereafter, as per the case of the prosecution, A3 comes into scene
4. The complainant believed what Sh. Venkatraman told him. Sh. Venkatraman is not before this court neither as an accused nor as a witness. Anything comes, without it becomes a hearsay evidence which is not admissible on the face of it.
5. Secondly, the alleged fact of visit of A3 A3 alongwith A1 C.A1, Sh. R. Venkatraman and A2 KM Singh on 06.02.2009 at Jantar Mantar has also not been mentioned by the complainant in his complaint Ex.PW2/A lodged on 09.02.2009. It is a matter of record that this version of the complainant came for the first time in his statement recorded on 03.03.2009. Thus, conspicuous absence of this plea in complaint Ex.PW2/A and existence of the same in the statement u/S.161 Cr.P.C. of the complainant, Ex.PW2/DA dated 03.03.2009, makes this plea unbelievable and unreliable.
6. Thus, I consider that as far as demand is concerned, there is no admissible evidence against accused A3 on record.
Accused A3 has also been charged for the offence u/S.7 & 13(1)(d) r/w S.13(2) of POC Act r/w S.120B IPC.
The prosecution has proved on record that after accused KM Singh being apprehended, further trap was laid in pursuant to which Sh. Venkatraman called A3 A3 and a meeting was fixed outside at Pan kiosk.
The tape recorded conversation, tranript of which has been proved on record indicates that accused A3 was in full knowledge of the transaction of bribe. He also knew the purpose of making of payment by the complainant.
Accused A3 also talked to C. A1 on telephone. This telephonic conversation also indicates that there was meeting of mind between accused A3 and C. A1. In the
QUESTION NEED ANSWERS
1. When it is admitted that anything comes in the absence of R Venkataramn becomes hearsay evidence whereas with the same breathe the trial court finds that R Venkataramn had spoke to A3 on telephone also becomes hearsay evidence coupled with who can be sid to be the maker of this record and who are those witnesses who are competent to identify the voice as per law the person who identified the voice of the accused must be maker of the record or by others who are competent to identify the voice
2. A3 spoke to A1 on telephone hence convicted If it is so then why to ignore the fact that A3 was apprehended prior to this conversation and was under the custody of police hence anything spoken or acts performed are not voluntary
3. A2 got acquitted and R Venkataraman was discharged and the court has returned its findings that ince r venkataraman is discharged by my predecessaor and this court has no device to summon him which clarly shows that ignoring crpc 319
arvindsharma
14 February 2015 at 09:17
1. I am proprietor of a proprietary firm which holds 49% shares in a Pvt Ltd firm.
2. I want to convert the Proprietary firm to partnership firm without changing the name.
3. Kindly guide me the way ahead and method to be followed
Athi Vishal HD
14 February 2015 at 09:05
Respected experts is it true that attempt to suicide decriminalised?
amar
14 February 2015 at 07:20
Cibil updated wrong information. Now after written to them corrected but i wanted to know as what kinds of legal action can be taken against them and member bank ICICI bank whi provided wrong information.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Cidco transfer
what is the role of cidco transfer in the transfer of property in navi mumbai area ?at the time of purchasing a property, Is it must while taking a Homeloan on that property ? If Cidco Transfer is not done at the time of purchase of the property along with the registered sale deed 7 years ago & the loan is sanctioned by the bank only on the basis of a registered sale deed without demanding the cidco transfer & if the borrower has defaulted on the loan repayment, can the bank or ARC attach the property and sell it in auction to recover its dues without cidco tranfer?then how the cidco transfer would be done without the borrower`s permission?