rajesh gandla
19 November 2017 at 19:39
Hi, We have given commercial shops for rent during last 20 to 25 years. None of them have any agreements papers for it. All are oral agreements. As the building life has been expired more than 60 years, we like to demolish it and reconstruct a commercial building. As there is risk of life under the premises.
But the tenant are not vacating the shops even through we have said them many times. How we can vacate them, as i know if we put a civil case it will take years. Is there any other ways to solve the problem, Kindly advice.
J V MURALIDAR RAO
19 November 2017 at 18:57
B sold property to C. C sold it to D. A files a case on D stating that D encroached A's Property. The proof submitted by A is Pahani (land revenue record copy before 1992). During X examination he stated that B got degree for the property (A and B are brothers , propert was acquired by their father) , he did not explain how got from the degree of his brother, lawyers have not probed further once he stated te above fact. Now after 5 years , when we thought it came to an end. A's lawyer issued notices to B & C.
Land was in te name of B in records when he sold it.
B - 1992 onwards was in the possession
C 1995-2003
D 2003- onwards.,
Whaether it is correct for A to now give notice to B & C , having not mentioned about them so long and based his case entirely on encroachment of land by D.
What is the position of D likely. does it anyway depend on proceedings against B & C.
Anonymous
19 November 2017 at 18:12
Namaste Sir
I am from Patan,Gujarat,India living in society built in 2009.Society authority wants to built a store room in the common plot near my house hunting our privacy.Is it legal to built store room by society auyhority in common plot.Hope you will guide me.
Anonymous
19 November 2017 at 18:08
Namaste Sir
I am from Patan,Gujarat,India living in society built in 2009.Society authority wants to built a store room in the common plot near my house hunting our privacy.Is it legal to built store room by society auyhority in common plot.Hope you will guide me.
rajasekaran
19 November 2017 at 16:27
In 138 NI Act case when the Housing Finance Company evades the notice in 1991 and signatories of the cheque are proceeded with in 1994, can the signatoires of the cheque be aquitted in 1997 because the charges on the company was not pressed as if company was not arrayed as accused ?
In appeal against aqquital u/s 378 of Crpc can a defence following Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels & Tours Private Limited, (2012) 5 SCC 661 be taken that charges against company was not pressed? The Housing company has surfaced and many have succeded in consumer forums as in Jugmandar Dass Bansal V/S M/S Tapoban Housing Finance Ltd. ,R. Udaya Kumar vs M/s. Tapoban Housing Finance Limited, New Delhi,etc
Anonymous
19 November 2017 at 11:33
It is respectfully submitted that the 1st respondent alleged to have been lodged a report to the 2nd respondent police station on 29.7.2015 stating that she and the petitioner are working as Police Constables in I.T. Cell in Cyberabad Police Commissionerate. It is alleged that the petitioner made the 1st respondent promised her to marry and made her to believe him. It is alleged that on 11.7.2015, the petitioner and the 1st respondent went to Yadagirigutta Temple on a bike, where he booked a room without her knowledge and raped her and promised that he will marry. It is further alleged that the petitioner made a phone call to the 1st respondent and said that marriage engagement was completed with his relative girl and that he and his family members threatened her to kill, if she disclose anything to any one. Basing on the said allegations, the police registered the FIR and subsequently filed the charge sheet. 2. It is respectfully submitted that the alleged offence under Section 376 IPC, according to the 1st respondent was occurred on 11.7.2015, whereas, she made report to the police station on 29.7.2015. Therefore, there is an abnormal delay in lodging the report to the police station. Further, the medical report also certified that there is no evidence of recent sexual intercourse. There is also contradictory statements of the 1st respondent from complaint to the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C (. On the ground of abnormal delay and in absence of the medical report, the essential ingredients under Section 376 IPC do not attract, therefore, the proceedings relating to the said offence are liable to be quashed. ( Is it possible or not ?) 3. Now her marriage was fixed and both are agreed to compromise as for CrPC 482.. But her layer is misguided her it's not possible, future problems will happen in personal life and services Maters. Please clarify
Mahesh Revelle
19 November 2017 at 08:06
1. It is respectfully submitted that the 1st respondent alleged to have been lodged a report to the 2nd respondent police station on 29.7.2015 stating that she and the petitioner are working as Police Constables in I.T. Cell in Cyberabad Police Commissionerate. It is alleged that the petitioner made the 1st respondent promised her to marry and made her to believe him. It is alleged that on 11.7.2015, the petitioner and the 1st respondent went to Yadagirigutta Temple on a bike, where he booked a room without her knowledge and raped her and promised that he will marry. It is further alleged that the petitioner made a phone call to the 1st respondent and said that marriage engagement was completed with his relative girl and that he and his family members threatened her to kill, if she disclose anything to any one. Basing on the said allegations, the police registered the FIR and subsequently filed the charge sheet.
2. It is respectfully submitted that the alleged offence under Section 376 IPC, according to the 1st respondent was occurred on 11.7.2015, whereas, she made report to the police station on 29.7.2015. Therefore, there is an abnormal delay in lodging the report to the police station. Further, the medical report also certified that there is no evidence of recent sexual intercourse. There is also contradictory statements of the 1st respondent from complaint to the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C (. On the ground of abnormal delay and in absence of the medical report, the essential ingredients under Section 376 IPC do not attract, therefore, the proceedings relating to the said offence are liable to be quashed. ( Is it possible or not ?)
3. Now her marriage was fixed and both are agreed to compromise as for CrPC 482.. But her layer is misguided her it's not possible, future problems will happen in personal life and services Maters. Please clarify.
Balagopal Menon
18 November 2017 at 18:10
Under which provision of the CRPC does the right to appeal lie from the interim order of the Metropolitan Magistrate?
Shasahnk
17 November 2017 at 19:00
In Madhya Pradesh State Service Exam, a general category candidate is vacating a seat of deputy collector post. So in normal situaiton, this vacancy should be filled from the waiting list by the candidate who has 1st waiting (Lets call him B).
But the already selected OBC candidate ( Lets call him A) in the main merit list has more marks then the candidate who is at 1st waiting position( i.e. A has more marks than B)
So, I want to ask that whether the vacant seat would be filled by the OBC candidate(i.e. A) in the main merit list by reshuffling him to the general category seat or will the seat be filled from waiting list by B irrespective of higher merit of OBC candidate in main merit list
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
regarding divorce case
Sir I hv filed divorce against my wife who's a advocate n now my adv n her adv told me to withdraw the case or pay the intrm money I think that I should withdraw the case but confused sir expert's pls tell me the further consequence I will face