Begin typing your search...
Lawfully yours: By Retired Justice K Chandru
Your legal questions answered by Justice K Chandru, former Judge of the Madras High Court. Do you have a question? Email us at citizen.dtnext@dt.co.in
By
migrator
migrator
Chennai
One party to a shady deal stands no chance before court of law
My father’s property went to my three brothers and a sister, based on a registered settlement deed and a will, which also said his first and fourth sons will jointly pay Rs 500/month to his only widowed daughter till her demise. The reason cited for not giving me (second son) any share is that I have filed a false case against them. After I argued with my eldest brother, he made a sale deed in favour of me for Rs 3 lakh and an encroached land of 350 sqft. I have the following questions: 1. The rights of the legal heir of my sister to recover the amount with interest (since she never received any money till she died in June of COVID), type of petition, rights to claim as per cost of living and based on their earnings (as against Rs 500/month).
2. My elder brother’s rights/liability to sell the encroached land to me with an assurance of his “perfect right, title and saleable interest etc… and indemnity clause to indemnify the purchaser against any loss, damage or injury sustained by the purchaser due to any defect mentioned in the sale deed”.
3. Whether the will can be challenged now on the grounds of suspicious circumstances.
— Juliot Jacob, Pallavaram, Chennai
From the reading of the backdrop of your case, I find you yourself party to a shady deal with your elder brother in getting a portion of the property for consideration. Therefore, you have no case under any circumstances against others. Your other queries show that you want to set up a case through the children of your deceased sister which also has no legal basis.
Internal reservations within a particular group liable to have intervention by apex court
The Punjab government has divided SC reservation into two parts, (i) SC (Ravidasia and Other) and (ii) SC (Mazbi and Balmiki). Due to this fact, cut-off marks of SC (Ravidasia and Other) go almost equivalent to unreserved castes. On the other hand, in the case of other SC (Mazbi and Balmiki), they do not get a sufficient number of qualified persons even. Prima facie this is a case where the interest of SC Ravidasia and others getting affected due to bifurcated reservation. I request you to help me understand the legal position.
— Balvir Kumar, Ludhiana
The judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court regarding the internal reservation made by the government among the Scheduled Castes is a subject matter of appeal and pending before the Supreme Court. The Madras High Court had also quashed the internal reservation of 10.5 per cent made in favour of the Vanniyar Community within the 20 per cent provided for Most Backward Classes.
The State of Tamil Nadu has moved the Supreme Court against this judgment. Similarly, 3.5 per cent reservation given to the Arunthathiyinar community within the 18 per cent reservation for Scheduled Castes in Tamil Nadu is also a subject matter of litigation before Madras High Court.
In the Andhra Pradesh case, the Supreme Court in E.V.Chinnaiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in 2005 (1) SCC 394 has disapproved the scheme of internal reservation within a particular group. Unless that judgment is reversed, all internal reservations within a particular group will also become suspect and be liable for intervention by the Supreme Court.
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed here are of Justice K Chandru, who is providing guidance and direction based on his rich experience and knowledge of the law. This is not a substitute for legal recourse which must be taken as a follow-up if so recommended in these columns
Visit news.dtnext.in to explore our interactive epaper!
Download the DT Next app for more exciting features!
Click here for iOS
Click here for Android
Next Story
