Property issues
4 years ago
Our proprietor is threatening us to vacate our flat when we have already paid 23lakhs and offering to pay the due im monthly fixed amounts.he is sending men to threat us during night .he is asking to 12lakh ar a time or else leave his the flat.according to the agreement if we can't pay the due im 1 yr he will cut 2% and return us the money but he is threatening us everytime just to vacate the flat all the documents of the flat are on my husband's name.when we are agreing to pay the due in fixed amount every month .how can they force us to vacate the flat ! The loan got cancelled from every as there is a dispute .our proprietor 's wife is treating us like tenants every time she is calling threatening us .my husband had bought the flat in 2018 but our proprietor handed over it in 2019 in the agreement it was mentioned after gettinv the handover og the flat if we arr not able clear the due in 1 yr they wi deduct 2% and return the money .but here they are just mentally torturing us during this lockdown period they are just going out of control and disturbing us .i need a legal advice on this asap .
A.Hi
It appears that you have entered in to an agreement to purchase the property and paid Rs23Lakhs advance and possession has been handed over to you in 2019. Since you already have the documents in your husband;s name, please file a petition for injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 Civil Procedure code obtain a stay order. You can obtain injunctions even during lock down period as courts are hearing urgent matters(your case is classified as emergency as there is a threat of eviction).
Hope this information is useful
It appears that you have entered in to an agreement to purchase the property and paid Rs23Lakhs advance and possession has been handed over to you in 2019. Since you already have the documents in your husband;s name, please file a petition for injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 Civil Procedure code obtain a stay order. You can obtain injunctions even during lock down period as courts are hearing urgent matters(your case is classified as emergency as there is a threat of eviction).
Hope this information is useful
Helpful
Helpful
Share
Suneel Moudgil
Responded 3 years ago
A.1. the proprietor cannot evict you using any illegal means,
2. to safeguard yourself from any unwanted circumstance, you can file a civil suit restraining the proprietor from dispossessing you from the property on the basis of the agreement,
you can contact me for a detailed discussion,
2. to safeguard yourself from any unwanted circumstance, you can file a civil suit restraining the proprietor from dispossessing you from the property on the basis of the agreement,
you can contact me for a detailed discussion,
Helpful
Helpful
Share
A.Dear Sir,
You can approach the civil court and get stay and also rely upon the following and other citations/judgments. Please give me Rank 5 if you feel my answer helped you
====================================================
Dear Sir,
Please get issue a legal notice on the basis of following judgment.
ICCI Bank Limited vs. Prakash Kaur case,
The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement reiterated its earlier stand that banks cannot deploy musclemen for recovery of loans from defaulters thus forcing them to end their lives.
"We deem it appropriate to remind the banks and other financial institutions that we live in a civilised country and are governed by the rule of law," a bench comprising Justices Tarun Chatterjee and Dalveer Bhandari said.
The court while dismissing the ICICI Bank's plea refused to delete the Delhi High Court's remarks that held the bank and its musclemen responsible for abetting a youth to commit suicide by humiliating him and taking away his motorcycle financed by the largest private sector bank.
It also asked the ICICI Bank to to pay Rs 25,000 as cost of this litigation to the respondents within three weeks and directed the Delhi Police to conclude the investigation against the bank expeditiously within three months, keeping in view the gravity of the allegations.
The court also directed the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Police to submit the investigation report in the Delhi High Court.
According to the court, complaints received by Reserve Bank regarding violation of the above guidelines and adoption of abusive practices followed by banks recovery agents would be viewed seriously.
Reiterating the RBI Guidelines on Engagement of Recovery Agents, the court said, "The Reserve Bank may consider imposing a ban on a bank from engaging recovery agents in a particular area, either jurisdictional or functional, for a limited period. In case of persistent breach of above guidelines, Reserve Bank may consider extending the period of ban or the area of ban."
"RBI had expressed its concern about the number of litigations filed against the banks in the recent past for engaging recovery agents who have purportedly violated the law," Justice Bhandari, writing the verdict for the bench, stated.
RBI in a letter accompanying its April 24, 2008 Guidelines had stated that it might consider imposing a ban on a bank from engaging recovery agents in a particular area, either jurisdictional or functional, for a limited period.
ICICI Bank had moved the apex court seeking deletion of some paragraphs in the High Court order which had said that "...the proximate cause of death of the deceased that led him to commit suicide was on account of humiliation caused by the Bank people from where loan was taken by him."
"The modus-operandi employed by the banks like ICICI for realisation of their loan amount and for recovering the possession of the vehicle against which loans are given is extra legal and by no stretch of imagination they can be permitted to employ musclemen and goons for recovery of their dues even from a defaulting party," the High Court had observed.
The High Court order had come on a petition filed by Shanti Devi Sharma, the deceased's mother, seeking a probe against the ICICI bank and its staff for the unlawful action, which led to the suicide of her 34-year old son Himanshu Dev Sharma.
Sharma had committed suicide in October 2005 by hanging himself at his house after he was allegedly intimidated and humiliated in front of his neighbours and family by recovery agents employed by the bank for recovering the loan amount taken for his motorcycle.
The ICICI Bank had contended that it was within its rights to recover loans and had followed the required procedure for recovering dues.
You can approach the civil court and get stay and also rely upon the following and other citations/judgments. Please give me Rank 5 if you feel my answer helped you
====================================================
Dear Sir,
Please get issue a legal notice on the basis of following judgment.
ICCI Bank Limited vs. Prakash Kaur case,
The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement reiterated its earlier stand that banks cannot deploy musclemen for recovery of loans from defaulters thus forcing them to end their lives.
"We deem it appropriate to remind the banks and other financial institutions that we live in a civilised country and are governed by the rule of law," a bench comprising Justices Tarun Chatterjee and Dalveer Bhandari said.
The court while dismissing the ICICI Bank's plea refused to delete the Delhi High Court's remarks that held the bank and its musclemen responsible for abetting a youth to commit suicide by humiliating him and taking away his motorcycle financed by the largest private sector bank.
It also asked the ICICI Bank to to pay Rs 25,000 as cost of this litigation to the respondents within three weeks and directed the Delhi Police to conclude the investigation against the bank expeditiously within three months, keeping in view the gravity of the allegations.
The court also directed the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Police to submit the investigation report in the Delhi High Court.
According to the court, complaints received by Reserve Bank regarding violation of the above guidelines and adoption of abusive practices followed by banks recovery agents would be viewed seriously.
Reiterating the RBI Guidelines on Engagement of Recovery Agents, the court said, "The Reserve Bank may consider imposing a ban on a bank from engaging recovery agents in a particular area, either jurisdictional or functional, for a limited period. In case of persistent breach of above guidelines, Reserve Bank may consider extending the period of ban or the area of ban."
"RBI had expressed its concern about the number of litigations filed against the banks in the recent past for engaging recovery agents who have purportedly violated the law," Justice Bhandari, writing the verdict for the bench, stated.
RBI in a letter accompanying its April 24, 2008 Guidelines had stated that it might consider imposing a ban on a bank from engaging recovery agents in a particular area, either jurisdictional or functional, for a limited period.
ICICI Bank had moved the apex court seeking deletion of some paragraphs in the High Court order which had said that "...the proximate cause of death of the deceased that led him to commit suicide was on account of humiliation caused by the Bank people from where loan was taken by him."
"The modus-operandi employed by the banks like ICICI for realisation of their loan amount and for recovering the possession of the vehicle against which loans are given is extra legal and by no stretch of imagination they can be permitted to employ musclemen and goons for recovery of their dues even from a defaulting party," the High Court had observed.
The High Court order had come on a petition filed by Shanti Devi Sharma, the deceased's mother, seeking a probe against the ICICI bank and its staff for the unlawful action, which led to the suicide of her 34-year old son Himanshu Dev Sharma.
Sharma had committed suicide in October 2005 by hanging himself at his house after he was allegedly intimidated and humiliated in front of his neighbours and family by recovery agents employed by the bank for recovering the loan amount taken for his motorcycle.
The ICICI Bank had contended that it was within its rights to recover loans and had followed the required procedure for recovering dues.
Helpful
Helpful
Share
Nishant Kumar
Responded 3 years ago
A.On the ground of giving late possession of flat, payment terms, exhisting agreement clause and harrasment...
You can file case in
consumer forum..
Civil dispute..
Criminal dispute..
And take direction in order of court for monthly payment terms...
You can file case in
consumer forum..
Civil dispute..
Criminal dispute..
And take direction in order of court for monthly payment terms...
Helpful
Helpful
Share
Ayantika Mondal @ Prime Legal
Responded 3 years ago
A.Hi,
Need to understand what type of right you have created over the property, see all the docs.
For urgent issues, you may seek police intervention to avoid any kind of harassment until the lockdown gets over.
Need to understand what type of right you have created over the property, see all the docs.
For urgent issues, you may seek police intervention to avoid any kind of harassment until the lockdown gets over.
Helpful
Helpful
Share
Read Related Answers
Street parking in residential colony
Dear Client,
Try to resolve the matter among yourself. Firstly if its an apartment try to complaint to the apartment authorities . Harassment per se would not be a valid ground apt to the scenario, Y...
Work money not paid
Dear Client,
This is a very tricky situation. Technically speaking there must have been a documentation of you resuming work after your first email and you continuing working there makes it unofficia...
Common wall
Dear Client,
Firstly please bring it to the notice of the apartment association if you live it in an apartment. Secondly communicate with your neighbours and learn as to what work is being done and...
Property joint way issue
Dear Client,
Given the situation, you need to adhere to the Schedule of the property as mentioned in the Sale Deed. In the query, you mentioned that the actual passage of all properties is 7 feet. In...
Varsai & will
Dear Client,
The wife of the deceased husband is not entitled to his ancestral property. According to Hindu Succession Act, only the coparceners of a Hindu joint family are entitled to inherit ancest...
Read Blogs on Civil
Civil Lawyers
Find Lawyers by Location
