Member (Account Deleted)
28 November 2011 at 18:49
In broad day light a huge new construction on a Defence A1 land in one of the Army Unit at Secunderabad is going on without any approval , sanction of Plan . On my query under RTI Act on the issue I am now intimated that the great new construction on the Defence A1 land of that Military Unit is mere a modification to the already existing UNIT REGIMENTAL RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION and hence required no approval of its building Plan by anybody. It is also intimated that expenditure is being incurred from the donations received from the devotees and hence no approval was necessary to undertake such a huge new construction . On my query with respect to the construction company undertaking the huge construction on the Defence A1 land , the answer was - No construction company has been engaged , it is being done on votultary work , may be KAR sEVA , they are referring too. Is that in order?
Anonymous
28 November 2011 at 12:28
I have retired from Stock Holding Corporation of India Limited in January, 2011. The organization pays annual bonus only to In-service employees. However they term this as Incentive payment and the payment is based on four grades A B, C and D. The payment is based on the attendance of the previous accounting year.
As I have retired and become ex-employee, am I eligible for the above payment. Can I demand the payment from the company.
I understand that the Incentive is additional payment to those who excel the well defined norms set by the company (like Sales Target, Production Target etc.) In the present case there is no such norms and it is sharing of profit earned by the company. Is the company legal in adopting the grades for the payment.
Please guide and reply me so that many ex-employees of SHCIL who have been deprived of Bonus can take steps to get the same. Please whom to approach and steps to be taken to get Bonus for ex employees.
Regards
Ganapathi S. Iyer
siri
28 November 2011 at 12:22
I have small technical doubt regarding mater belongs to all courts in India
1)IF sale agreement is made b/w me & vendee for amount of 10 lakhs with token amount 1 lakh before 2 moths.Now I filed suit for Title declaration for my property on vendee who denying my Title due to some problems & I also submitted sale agreement of b/w me & vendee to court.Now my question is
1)For Title declaration whether I can pay court fee for calculating property valuation is 10 lakhs with help of only sale agreement made b/w us before 2 months & with out submitting any other proof for valuation of that property.
2)If above is situation,can I show sale agreement made before 2 months b/w me & vendor to court for proof for valuation of property in order to calculate court fee for Title declaration & with out submitting any other proof.Please reply sir
Anonymous
25 November 2011 at 13:21
One of my client is a private limited company registered under service tax on freight charges payable.
However, the GTA has collected service tax on the freight charges paid by the company.
Whether the company is liabile to pay service tax on those bills if it is liable, whether the service tax collected by the GTA can be claimed as input credit. Then the liablitiy will be Nil.
Kindly clarify.
Yours truly
P. Srinivasa
Anonymous
25 November 2011 at 11:46
i would like to know my society is registered under maharashtra co-op hsg society,so there is any compulsion the flat must be registered seprately for loan what is different pls clarify doubt......thank you
varma
25 November 2011 at 10:22
sir, In High court my father lost his case i.e house in 300 sq yd land in year 2008.But recently we came to know that during filing the case i.e our opposend submit valuation of market is 3 lakhs instead of 12 lakhs & paid cout fee accordingly.At that time due to ignorance we donot raise that point.Final decree also pssed in favour of opposend in june/2008.Now my father also expired.Now My question is
1)Whether I can challenge in court due to undervalued of stampduty, put the decree a side & cancell the order
2)What is the time period to challenge the undervalued stamp duty after final decree is passed
3)Not only me,Any 3rd party i.e outsiders who knows this truth of undervalued stamp duty can challenge in court after once final decree is passed & IN how many days 3rd party can challenge in court after final decree is passed against undervalud stampduty of court fee.
Anonymous
20 November 2011 at 13:11
sir our property is land locked no way to go from the north,east we have a gate in the west side of our property but the land owner that side has blocked our way by keeping a coconut tree in the way when we ask her to remove it she started say the gate is not shown on your house plan so this is not your way
now on the south side there is the gate shown on our house plan but there was no access initially,
now a builder has build an entire society there without leaving his own wall he has taken our wall and left 3mts from there saying the wall does not belong to one person it is mutual wall
then he gave us in writing on his stamp pad that he wont block our access since we were thinking of going to court
then later he gave us in writing the same on a stamp paper but did not sign on the registrar office we ask some lawyer if this is good enough they some said its good enough to fight the case while others said it wont stand any good after one year
now we had got our road access marked from the pda for a proposed road
now since his building is complete and people are already staying the builder is saying he wont allow us to pass our sewage through our access
can he prevent us from passing sewage through the access????
can the society block our access in the future???as on our plan that is the only gate shown from where we can pass
is there anything we can do??
what should we do??
Anonymous
20 November 2011 at 07:21
Dear Experts,
This query is to get your independent opinions regarding Sections 34(1),(2)and (3) of Wildlife Protection Act 1972 visa vis Arms Act 1959 and fundamental rights. Wildlife Protection Act 1972 can be read at http://envfor.nic.in/legis/wildlife/wildlife1.html
My position will be that arms are fundamental right under Articles 19 and 21 supported by reasoning put forth in following links and High Court judgements as well as but not limited to doctrine of precedence, natural justice, strict scrutiny etc.:
1) Judgements of High Courts http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=15638 and http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=15639
2) http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/RKBA-guaranteed-under-Articles-19-and-21-of-Constitution-36011.asp
I want to establish Sections 34(1),(2)and (3) of Wildlife Protection Act 1972 to be unreasonable, superfluous and ultra vires.
Following is the zist of my reasoning:
Section 34(1) and (2) of Wildlife Protection Act 1972 are putting unreasonable, unnecessary and needless burden on arms license holders when arms are already well regulated under Arms Act 1959 and information about all arms license holders in the area is already present with the District Magistrate.
Liberty is guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution. Liberty includes not be be put under unnecessary, unreasonable burden, harassment or insult. Arms licenses or exemptions from licenses are issued to law abiding citizens by following the due process of law and putting all of them under unreasonable burden and suspicion amounts to treating them like criminals is affront to them and their Liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. Chief Wildlife Warden without any reasonable suspicion asking all arms license holders to line up at his office under Section 34(1) and (2) of of Wildlife Protection Act 1972, amounts to insult and harassment of arms license holders.
If he ever has credible evidence about violation of Wildlife Protection Act 1972 with help of arms against any person, he is anyways free to request information related to arms license from the District Magistrate or file a case in appropriate court of law.
Moreover since arms are a fundamental right, the Chief Wildlife Warden can safely assume that since arms are fundamental right, every citizen who is not barred by law from possessing arms, is in possession of arms. Section 34(3) is ultra vires and superfluous since arms are fundamental right under Articles 19 and 21 of Constitution and hence every citizen unless disqualified under Section 14 of Arms Act 1959 is entitled to keep and bear arms as per law. Where is the need to require concurrence of Chief Wildlife Warden when there is already a provision for police report about the arms license applicant?
Sam D'costa
20 November 2011 at 01:07
We want to take land situated in mumbai on lease from maharashtra govt.
We are presently occupant on said land from past aprrox 35 years. Said land is small part of the major land area which have been sold by the owner whose name is on property card and 7/12. This small portion remained undeveloped due to our possession and we dint allowed builder to take our land. but now we heared that the said portion of land have been kept vacant because he used it for FSI. So we believe that know the said land belongs to govt.
We are paying NA for this land since 1981.
We do not want to go for declaration procedure claiming adverse possession due to time and fund consuming process. Instead lease will be better option.
Kindly suggest process and applicable acts, regulation to refer.
Thanking you
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Land with remark
Dear Sir,
Please explain me the detail of land having following remarks in its 7/12.
1]Navin Sirt
2]Juni Sirt
3]Aadivaasi
4]CRZ
can we by above land and get construction permision?Please help me and suggwst any book explaining land ruleas and other aspects in maharashtra.