Written - Statement - Denial

.......... Written - Statement.......... & ........................ Denial..

                                      

- Denial in written statement must  be specific in respect of each  allegation in plaint against defendant.

- Denial in written statement must specific in respect of  each allegation of fact of which defendant does not admit the truth.

- Defendant in written statement must not evasively denies allegation against him but answer the point of substance.

- Every allegation of fact in plaint , if not denied specifically or by necessary implication or stated to be admitted in pleading of defendant , shall be taken to be admitted.

- Basically as per provision of pleading allegation by plaintiff in plaint against defendant shall be specially denied in written statement if not denied amount to be admitted.

- Basically pleading means plaint & written statement.

======== Relevant Provision =======

- Order 6 Rule 1 , Order 8 Rule 3/4/5 of Civil Procedure Code 1908.

............ Relevant Judgement....................

- M. Venkataramana Thevnar (D) by Lrs v/s M.Rajagopal He bar  & A.I.R.2007 S.C.(Supp) 43.

- M/s Gian Chand & Brothers & Another v/s Rattan Lal @ Rattan Singh A.I.R.2013 S.C.1078.

- Subramani and Ors v/s M. Chandralekha A.I.R. 2005 S.C.485.

- Jaspat Kaur Cheers and Anr v/s M/s Industrial Trade Links and and Ors etc 2017 (7) SCALE 230 = 2017 SAR 757.

.......... please peruse/read previous Blog & comment give suggestion for better development of next Blog...

.

- 

- 

.. Blending.....

Blending.......... ........ Joint Family Property

                                    

- Principle of Blending in respect of joint family property basic requirement.

- Basically existence of  coparcenary property is essential for blending of a coparcener's separate property with the coparcenary property. If there is no coparcenary property then there can be obviously no blending or throwing of self acquired property into the common stock.

 - Existence of coparcenary ,coparcenary property and separate property  is basic requirement for blending

- Property which was originally the Separate or Self - acquired property of a member (coparcener) of a joint family may by operation of the doctrine of blending become joint family property, if it has been voluntarily thrown by him into common stock with the intention of abandoning all separate claims upon it.

- A clear intention to waive his separate rights must be established.

- Blending will neither be inferred from the mere fact of his allowing the other members of the family to use it conjointly with himself nor from the fact that the income of the separate property was used to support a son or from the mere failure of a member to keep separate accounts of his earning.

- Blending principle does not to female who is not coparcener.

- A clear intention of blending is required.

====== Relevant Provision ======

 - Un codified Hindu Law ... Principle of Blending.

--------- Relevant Judgement -------------

- D.S.Lakshmaiah and And v/s Balasubramanyam and And A.I.R 2003 S.C.3800  = 2003 SAR 817.

- Venkata Reddy v/s Laksh mama A.I.R. 1963 S.C.1601.

- KV Narayan v/s Ranganadhan A.I.R.1976 S.C.1715.

- Subramania Reddy v/s Venkatsubba Reddy A.I.R 1999 S.C.1116.

......... please peruse/read previous Blog & comment give suggestion for better development of next Blog.......

Burden of Proof- Civil Suit..

....... Burden of Proof................. Civil Suit...... basic ... Requirement....

                                        

- Basically burden of  proof lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side.

- Burden of proof lies on the person whoever desires any court to give judgement as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts , must prove that those facts exists.

- Burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on that person who wishes the court to believe in its existence , unless it is provided by any law that the proof that fact shall lie on any particular person.

- Burden of proof of relationship is on the person who affirms it.

= = = = = = Relevant Provision = = = = =

- Section 101, 102, 103, 109 of The Indian Evidence Act 1872.

.......... Relevant Judgement .........................

- Chairman Board of Trust Sri Ram Mandir Jagtil Karimnagar District , A.P. v/s S. Rajya laxmi (D) & Ors 2019 SAR 188.

- Ali Hussain (D) Thr Lrs v/s Rabiya & Ors 2019 SAR 1058.

- Jagdish Prasad Pate v/s Shivnath & Ors 2019 SAR 765.

- Rathnamma & others v/s Sujathamma & others 2020 Mh.L.J.36.

- Rangammal v/s Kuppuswami 2011 SAR 712 = A.I.R.2011 S.C.2344.

- Subhra Mukherjee v/s Bharat Cocking Coal Ltd A.I.R.2000 S.C. 1203.

- Krushna Mohan Kul v/s Pratima Maity A.I.R.2003 S.C.760.

...... Please peruse/read previous BLOGS.......

= Delay - Application ........

Delay Application ....................................... for any Appeal / Application - basic requirement ...

                                     

- Any appeal or any application may be admitted after the prescribed period , if the appellate or applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal  or making application within such prescribed period .

- Sufficient cause ... the appellate or the applicant was misled by any order , practice or judgment of the High Court in ascertaining or computing the prescribed period may be sufficient cause .

- Right to appeal is statutory right it cannot be deprived only on ground of delay so Sufficient Cause should be given liberal construction so as to advance suitable justice .

- Negligence of an Advocate is sufficient cause to condone delay .

- Differing legal advice by different advocate could be sufficient cause to condone delay .

- Mistake of an advocate is also sufficient cause to condone delay .

- Length of delay is however , no matter - explanation for delay is the only criteria for condonation of delay .

- Every day's delay must be explained does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made .

- Application for condonation of delay may be filed even after filing of an appeal or application .

- In Delay application appellate or applicant may claim Interim Relief like Stay/Injunction etc which is necessary for ends of justice .

............ Relevant Provision ...................

- Section 5 of The Limitation Act 1963.

- Order 41 Rule 3A of Civil Procedure Code 1908.

====== Relevant Judgment ==========

- Bhivchandra Shankar More v/s Balu Gangaram More & ors  2019 SAR 632.

- K. Subbarayudu and Others  v/s The Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition ) 2017 SAR 1003 = (2017) 8 SCALE 61.

- Perumon Bhagvath Devaswom Perinadu Vill v/s Bhargavi Amma (Dead) By Lrs  & Ors  A.I.R.2009 S.C.(Supp) 886= 2008 SAR 790.

- Manoharan v/s Sivarajan & Ors  2014 SAR 23.

- N. Balakrishnan v/s M. Krishnamurthy A.I.R.1998 S.C.3222.

- Sonabai Kerappa Katkarb v/s Mohamad Jilani Mohmad Washid Shaikh 2008(6) All.M.R.323= 2008(5) Mh.L.J.411.

- Suresh G. Ramnani v/s Aurelia Ana Da Piedade Miranda alias Araiyo Alvares 2012(5) Mh.L.J. 40.

- Bhausaheb Hiraman Makale v/s Laxman Shankar Gaikwad 2012(1) Mh.L.j. 168.

- Pratapchand Lakhamaji Jain v/s Smt. Lilabai Krishanath 1998 (3) Mh.L.J. 706.

- Vinodkumar v/s Kailaskumar Makhanlal Chaudhari 2011(1) Mh. L. J. 269.

- Shaikh Ibrahim Jan Mohammad v/s Tekchand Rathod 1986 Mh.L.J.902.

......... Please peruse/read Previous Blogs & comment give suggestion for better development of next Blog.....

Pre - emption - Right

....... Pre - emption ......... .... under Hindu Succession Act 1956........

                                       

                           

- Right of Pre emption  in respect of immovable property or business of intestate shall devolve on the heirs Specified in Class I of the Shedule of the Hindu Succession Act be acquire by one of the above heir specified in Class - I 

-  Right of pre emption does not apply when property devolves by survivorship .

- Right of pre emption does not accrues unless Succession open .

- Right of pre emption apply to agricultural property also.

- Right of pre emption apply to proposed transfer .

- Right of pre emption may apply to property transferred .

- If two or more class I heirs claim right of pre emption then heir who offers Highest Consideration for transfer shall be preferred .

- Remedy to enforcement of right of Pre emption is to file a civil suit .

- Right of Pre emption can be claimed within 1 year - the said period begins -  when  the purchaser takes under the sale sought to be impeached , physical possession of whole or part of the property sold , or , where the subject - matter of the sale does not admit of physical possession of the whole or part of the property , when the instrument  of sale is registered .

............... Relevant Provision ................

- Section 22 of The Hindu Succession Act 1956.

- The Class - I of  The Shedule of above act.

- Article 97 of The Limitation Act 1963.

= = = = = = = =Relevant Judgement = = = = =

- Ashutosh Chaturvedi v/s Prano Devi A.I.R.2008 S.C.2171 = 2008 SAR 870.

- Ramlal Maniram Navdhinge v/s Maniram Patiram Navdhinge 2008(1) Mh.L.J.860.

- Bharat Machindra Parekar v/s Ajanabai Baburao Thaware 2007(6) Mh.L.J.706.

- Babu Ram v/s Santosh Singh A.I.R. 2019 S.C.1506 = 2020 All.S.C.R.317

............. please read/peruse my PREVIOUS BLOGS & comment , give suggestion for better development of next Blog ......

Benami - Transaction .........

........... Benami Transaction ..................

                                      

- Means any transaction in which any property ( movable ,immovable , tangible , intangible , any right  / interest  in such property ) transferred to One person for a consideration Paid or Provided by Another Person .

- The property purchased by any person in the name of his wife or unmarried daughter for their benefit does not bar by benami act unless contrary is proved .

- The property is purchased in the name of Coparcener in the  Hindu Undivided Family  for the benefit of the Coparcenary does not bar by benami .

- The property purchased in the name of Trustee  or Person of Fiduciary Capacity is not by benami .

- Basically following particular be taken into consideration  for Benami Transaction 

a) the source from which the purchase money came .

b) the nature & possession of the property after the purchase.

c) motive if any for giving the transaction a benami colour .

d) the position of the parties & relationship if any between claimant and the alleged benamidar .

e) the custody of the title deeds after the sale .

f) the conduct of the parties concerned in dealing with the property after the sale .

-  No suit , claim  , action  to enforce any right in respect of any property held Benami.

- All properties held Benami liable to acquisition as per procedure prescribed by Government .

- The Benami Transaction Act is prospective and not retrospective in operations .

- Whoever enters into any benami transaction shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years or with fine or both.

.......... Relevant Provision .............................

--- The Benami Transaction Act 1988 (it come into force since 5 September 1988)

---------  Relevant Judgement -------------------------

- Probodh Chandra Ghosh v/s Urmila Dassi & Anr A.I.R.2000 S.C.2534.

- Rajappa Hanamantha Ranoji v/s Mahadev Channabasappa A.I.R.2000 S.C.2108.

- Binapai Paul v/s Pratima Ghosh & Ors A.I.R. 2008 S.C.543.

- Shankaranarayana Rao v/s Leelavathy  2007 SAR 540.

- Samittri Devi v/s Sampuran Singh A.I.R.2011 S.C.773.

- Smt.P.Leelavathi (D) by Lrs v/s V.Shankarnarayan Rao 2019 SAR 672.

= = = = = = please read/peruse my previous BLOGS comment ,give suggestion for better development of next Blog = = = = = = = =