Suit for declaration alone - Plaint returned by office - whether proper.

2011(1) TAMILNADU LAW NOTES JOURNAL – Page 210

Tamilnadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act 1955, Section 25(b) & (d) – Plaint filed for declaration alone without – On revision High court declared that declaration shall not be issued of plaintiff is able to seek further relief than mere declaration and omitted to seek – at the stage of presentation court has to go through plaint averment alone – further relief can be decided after issue of summons and on the basis of averments in the written statement – return of plaint held is incorrect – direction given to represent plaint – Civil revision petition ordered with directions.

Annual General Body Meeting

Pondicherry Bar Association has decided to have its Annual General Body Meeting to be held on Monday     {31-01-2011} for submitting the accounts for the period 2010-2011.

Power of Attorney

(2009) 6 MADRAS LAW JOURNAL – Page 945

Family courts Act, Section 13 – Code of Civil Procedure, Order 3 Rule 1 – Proceedings for dissolution of marriage – Wife has to necessarily be in France, since their children cannot travel out of France – Wife seeking permission to be represented through Power agent – Family court refusing permission – Order challenged in revision – In matrimonial cases, no legal practitioner is normally allowed to appear for parties – If any party to the proceeding is prevented from appearing before the court, there is no legal impediment to grant permission to the party to be represented by power agent – When the court is of the opinion that the presence of the party is required for the purpose of counseling or settlement, then it may direct the party to appear at that stage – Wife granted permission to be represented by her power agent, till the commencement of trial – CRP allowed. 

Succession

2008(3) TAMILNADU LAW NOTES JOURNAL – Page 292 (Civil)

Hindu Marriage Act 1955 – Section 16 – Children born out of void marriages are legitimate but cannot become coparcener in the Hindu Undivided Family of their father – Suit for partition filed by Second wife children in all properties including ancestral – decreed by trail court – on appeal by first wife and children High court held that children born to second wife are also legitimate but are only entitled to share in the self acquired properties of father and not in ancestral as they are not coparceners – appeal allowed in part.

Strike

Tommorrow {25-01-2011}, Advocates of Pondicherry Bar Association go on a one day token strike, marking the humiliation suffered by an Advocate in Srilanka.

Condonation of delay

2011 (1) CURRENT TAMILNADU CASES – Page 276

Section 5 – Tamil Nadu Buildings (lease and rent control) Rules 1960– Rule 25 – Code of Civil procedure – Order 22 Rule 4 – Legal heirs of deceased tenant can be brought on record on his death and such proceedings are covered by Rule 25 and provisions contained in Order 22 Rule 4 are not applicable to such proceedings – Section 5 is applicable to application under Rule 25 and delay in bringing LR’s on record can be condoned for sufficient reasons.

Condonation of delay – Delay found to be not enormous and further right of appeal under Rent Control Act is very valuable right and such right should not be denied unless applicant is guilty of supine indifference.

Section 149 of CPC

2008(2) TLNJ (Civil) – Page 96

Section 149 of CPC & Section 4 of Tamilnadu Court Fees and Suits valuation Act 1955 – (Payment of court fee without notice to defendant) A money suit was represented with required court fee – Plaint admitted without notice to defendant – during trial defendant sought rejection of suit – filed application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC – dismissed – on revision High court opined that where the time granted to pay the deficit court fee within the period of limitation the defendant need not be heard-otherwise when noticed, the court should frame an issue relating to limitation due to non-payment of court fee along with plaint – permit parties to lead evidence and decide the issue – directions given to trial court.

Landlord - Definition

(2009) 6 MADRAS LAW JOURNAL page 1158

Section 2(6) – Landlord – Expression “landlord” in Section 2(6) is an inclusive definition – Any person receiving or is entitled to receive rent of building whether on his own or on behalf of another is deemed to be a landlord.

30 year old documents - presumption

2010(5) CURRENT TAMILNADU CASES – Page 874

Section 90 – Documents that are 30 years old prove themselves – Appropriate weightage has to be given to antiquity – Section 90 would stand attracted only if document is produced from proper custody before court – Proper custody means “custody of any individual connected with deed not tainted by fraud or suspicion” – Ancient document should also be corroborated by some evidence and court can consider internal and external evidence of document regarding acceptance of signature, execution or attestation – Sale deed of 1961 containing averments of partition considered to be genuine and no formal proof of such document is required. 

Pleadings – Adverse Possession - Order 7 of CPC – Party to suit claimed ownership to suit property by virtue of sale deed cannot seek to prove same by adverse possession.

Production of Documents - Whether mandatory?

2009(3) CURRENT TAMILNADU CASES – Page 121

Order 7 Rule 14 of CPC – Production of document – Not mandatory for plaintiff – Defendant cannot compel plaintiff to produce documents, which are basis for plaint, invoking Order 7 Rule 14 (1).

Production of document at time of presenting plaint is directory only and not mandatory – Documents can be produced with leave of court at later point of time also – When plaintiff seeks to produce documents at a later stage and fails to do so, plaintiff will face consequences and defendant cannot compel plaintiff to produce documents.

Pondicherry Cultivating Tenants Protection Act

2010(4) CURRENT TAMILNADU CASES – Page 299

Pondicherry Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1970, Section 8 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 9 – Jurisdiction of Civil Court – Bar of Jurisdiction of Civil court – Suit for bare injunction against lessee not to cultivate crops other than Paddy – Maintainability of civil suits – Defendant contended that in view of Section 8 of Act, Civil court has no jurisdiction to entertain any suit in respect of Cultivating tenants – Held, civil court has jurisdiction to entertain suit for bare injunction – Section 8 of the Act does not oust civil court jurisdiction to entertain suit for injunction.

Registration Stamp duty

Sl.No.	Nature of Deed	Stamp Duty	Registration Fee
1.	Conveyance (As per Not.8834/Rev./ CS/2004 dt.17/12/2004)	10% (SD-5% + TD-5%) In case of Women Purchaser SD 5% only.	As per value of property (GLR rate) or value mentioned in the document whichever is higher (Rs.145 for first 10,000/- and Rs.5 for each Rs.1000)
2.	Settlement	1%  Maximum Rs.5000/-	- do -
	Revocation of Settlement	Rs.100/-	Rs.20/-
	Gift (No Transfer Duty)	10% SD only	As per value of property mentioned in the document or GLR rate whichever is higher.
	Partition Deed	1% Maximum Rs.5000/-	- do -
	Mortgage Deed (without possession)	2% ceiling; Rs.2 lakhs	- do -
	Mortgage Deed (with possession)	0.5% ceiling Rs.50K SD + 5% TD	- do -
	Power of Attorney (General)	Rs.20/-	Rs.50/-
	Power of Attorney More than 5 persons	Rs.100/-	- do -
	Power of Attorney Special	Rs.20/-	- do -
	Cancellation	Rs.50/-	Rs.20/-
	Adoption Deed	Rs.33.75	Rs.20/-
	Rectification/Correction Deed	Rs.4.50	Rs.7.50
	Ratification Deed	Rs.4.50	Rs.7.50
	Release Deed	Rs.22.50	Rs.20 or as per value of the property if value is mentioned
	Mortgage made over	Rs.22.50	As per value of property
	Indemnity bond	Rs.22.50	- do -
	Trust Deed	Rs.67.50	- do -
	Agreement	Rs.10/-	Rs.20/- for general agreement or as per value of transaction, if value is mentioned
	Receipt & discharge of Mortgage	Re.1/-	Rs.8.50
	Declaration/ Affidavit	Rs.4.50	Rs.20/-
	Will	Nil	Rs.30/-

Pongal Greetings

I Wish you all a Very Happy Pongal

Vinoba.L
Advocate,
Pondicherry.

Useful Legal Websites

Plz find the list of legal websites useful to most of us

• www.lawadiv.com 

 .  www.indialawsite.com,
• www.India Corporate Advisor.com
• www.Indianlegaleagle.com
• www.indiaitlaw.com
• www.ipindia.com
• www. indialawworld.com
• www. legalserviceindia.com
• www.Supremecourtofindiacaselaw.com
• www.law of india.org
• www.mahalibrary.com
• www.indlaw.com
• www.lexsite.com
• www.waqalat.com
• www.india laws.com
• www.lawsinindia.com
• www.lawyersonclick.com
• www.legal pundits
• www.india-laws.com
• http://www.companylawinfo.com
• http://www.lawchips.com
• http://www.lawguru.com
• http://www.globallawreview.com
• www.vakilno1.com
• www.indlegal.com
• www.taxnYou.com
• www.indiataxlaws.com
• www.indiapropertylaws.com
• www.lawchips.com
• www.laws4india.com
• www.NRI Laws.com
• www.lawindiainfo.com
• www.law & courts judgments
• www.cyberkanoon
• www.legalaidindia.com
• www.cyberlawindia
• www.Naavi.com
• www.vakilbabu.com
• www.indiaLawInfo.com
• www.Indiainfo Law
• www.Legal Service India.com
• www.Manupatra.com
• www.indiancourts.nic.in
• http://indiacode.nic.in/
• http://www.supremecourtofindia.nic.in/
• www.llrx.com/features/indian
• www.allindiareporter.com
• http://goidirectory.nic.in/stateut.htm
• www.judis.nic.in
• http://www.indiacorporateadvisor.com
• www.lawcommissionofindia.nic.in
• http://lawmin.nic.in/ncrwc/ncrwcreport.htm
• http://www.indiamap.com/
• http://lawmin.nic.in/
•www.patentoffice.nic.in/i
•http://www.mca.gov.in/
•http://www.sarkaritel.com/ministries...tice/index.htm
•www.goidirectory.nic.in/exe.htm

Demolition and Re-construction

• 2004 (2) CTC page 364 – Supreme Court

 Bonafide requirements for demolition and reconstruction – Landlord could seek to demolish building and reconstruct even if building is good, if such building does not suit requirement of landlord – Landlord need not prove that building is such that it requires immediate demolition particularly when landlord requires building for himself – Tenant admitted that building is 100 years old and land lord has necessary financial support to demolish building and reconstruct same – Ingredients for demolition and reconstruction made out – Enter case law discussed.

Adverse Possession

2009(5) CURRENT TAMILNADU CASES – Page 558

Adverse Possession – Plea based on title and adverse possession cannot go together – Doctrine of adverse possession can be claimed only when title of owner is accepted – Plea of adverse possession cannot be accepted when plea of ownership based on title is pleaded by party claiming adverse possession – Adverse possession is also not decided on length of possession alone.

Entitlement of share by hindu female heirs

2010(5) CURRENT TAMILNADU CASES – Page 51

Hindu Succession Act, 1955 (25 of 1955) – Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 (39 of 2005) – Effect of – Daughters, who were married before coming into force of Tamilnadu Act 1 of 1990 on 25-03-1989, were not entitled to benefit of same – Since marriage of plaintiff took place in year 1975, she is not entitled to benefit of Tamilnadu Act 1 of 1990 – Tamilnadu Act 1 of 1990 has been replaced by a similar provision viz, Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 – Appeal filed by 1^st defendant dismissed – Appeal filed by plaintiff partially allowed.

Deficit court fees

2008(2) TLNJ (Civil) – Page 96

Section 149 of CPC & Section 4 of Tamilnadu Court Fees and Suits valuation Act 1955 – (Payment of court fee without notice to defendant) A money suit was represented with required court fee – Plaint admitted without notice to defendant – during trial defendant sought rejection of suit – filed application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC – dismissed – on revision High court opined that where the time granted to pay the deficit court fee within the period of limitation the defendant need not be heard-otherwise when noticed, the court should frame an issue relating to limitation due to non-payment of court fee along with plaint – permit parties to lead evidence and decide the issue – directions given to trial court.

Whether Exparte Decree

(2009) 7 MADRAS LAW JOURNAL – Page 869

Order 17, Rule 2 – Whether judgment and decree passed under Order 17, Rule 2 is a decree on merit or an Exparte decree – Two conditions to invoke Order 17(1) a substantial portion of evidence of any party has already been adduced and (2) whether said party failed to appear on any day to which the hearing of the suit is adjourned – When case was posted for further evidence defendant did not appear and evidence was closed – Failed to appear for arguments – Judgment delivered after hearing arguments – Therefore, it is decree on merits and not an exparte decree – Trial court rightly dismissed applications filed under Order 9 Rule 13 – Appeal dismissed.

Pleadings

2009 (4) CURRENT TAMILNADU CASES – Page 377

Order 6 Rule 2 – Pleadings – Absence of – Effect of – Held: It is axiomatic principle of law that without pleadings with regard to particular aspect, no evidence can be adduced and further any amount of evidence without necessary pleadings need not be looked into – Without pleading court cannot come to a conclusion on basis of evidence.