ajay sethi's Expert Profile

Queries Replied : 31529

+ View Full Profile

What kinds of questions I can and can't answer?

My area of expertise

My experience in the area (years):

Organizations I belong to:

Publications or writing which has appeared :

Educational credentials:

Award & Honors:

Shiva says : Ancestros prperty
Sir my father, uncle and grandfather sold a property in 1995 by singing GPA,.. but they were not aware of the value of the property but have signed blindly for 4 acres land in Bangalore, while the deal was agreed for 3.20 guntas. Myself and my yelder sisters was minor at the time of sale happened. Hence i am the grand son and two grand daughters who are married,.. do i have a rights to file a case against my ancestors property,... even now in PAHANI (RTC) the property is in my grand fathers name.. Please suggest a way.. whether theirs any way to get a compensation by filing a case,....

Hema Kishnani says : thanx
sir, i am grateful to you for your expert advise which helped me solve my problem regarding housing society..i need some advise on my personal problem that i am facing in my marriage.

theinkfruit says :
Dear Sir, Kindly advice on this issue of mine. Can an employee working in a PSU be terminated after resigning during probation?, The resignation was accepted and the acceptance letter from the organisation stated that the resignation is accepted and that the relieving would be provided subject to payment of the bond amount on or before a specific date. But the letter was received by the employee only two days after the date specified. and before anyother communication was made from the employee side the employer sends another letter stating that the employee stands terminated as the bond money was not paid within the specified time however the bond money would have to be paid. can a employee be terminated after the acceptance of resignation letter by the organisation? and just becos the bond amount was not paid within the specified date without any notice before? Kindly advice sir.

JAI GANESH says : Sir I need ur opinion for my moot court problem
Sohan lal was head of the hindu joint family consisting of his wife Gayatri devi, two sons mohan lal (married ) , sham lal (unmarried )and unmarried daughter kavita . sohan lal was running joint family business with his sons at nabha (Punjab) by diverting a major portion of the income ,yielded from 200 acres of ancestral land ,into the business of the family .all members of the joint family were living in an ancestral house. Mohan lal had 3 sons;namely, sant ram , Ram lal and bant lal and one daughter geeta devi . Sohan lal and his wife died in the year 1985 and 1986 respectively. After the death of his father ,Mohan lal became the head of the family. On becoming the head of the family he undertook a large scale diversification of business which was shifted to Patiala . and in order to augment the joint family business, mohan lal sold 10 acres of ancestral land for rupees 10 crores to the Punjab and sind bank ,Patiala.he also made a gift of rs. 10 lacs in favour of his un -married daughter geeta devi. Bant lal the youngest son of mohan lal was sent to England for his higher education at the expenses of the family. After doing Bar-at law , he returned to india and established a flourishing practice as an advocate .although he was staying in the joint family ,he kept his earnings for himself, which was not liked by his two elder brothers and his sister. Frustrated and depressed by the behavior of his own sons, mohan lal died of heart attack in 2006. Realizing the reactionary behavior of her brothers, geeta devi daughter of mohan lal filed a suit in the year 2007 for declaration of ownership as coparcener and co-sharer in the joint family property wheren she also made a prayer for joint possession of the property in the dispute that included agricultural land , business assets/ goodwill and ancestral house. She also prayed that income of bat lal advocate be included in the joint property of the family .the alienation made by mohan lal in favour of punjab and sind nank, Patiala was also challenged. In this suit she impleaded all her 3 brothers, Punjab and sind bank,Patiala and her uncle sham lal as defendants. in order to establish her claim, geeta devi invoked section 6 of the Hindu succession Act,1956. The defendents pleaded that (i)the alienation in favour of Punjab and sind bank ,Patiala was for legal necessity and benefits of estate and, therefore,valid: (ii)the amendment made by the Hindu succession (Amendment) Act,2005 was prospective and the alienation under challenge being prior to the amendment was not affected by the change in law and (iii) the Hindu succession (amendment ) Act ,2005 being wholly against the concept of coparcenary and joint Hindu family property in law is illegal ,non -est and ultra-vires.

f.shaikh says :
hi sir am new here i want some advise from you sir

Click here to see all answered queries

Comment Please

Other LCI Experts

Rajendra K Goyal
Queries Replied : 53581

Raj Kumar Makkad
Queries Replied : 44370

Devajyoti Barman
Queries Replied : 34799