The suit has been withdrawn by plaintiff in the above case.
No body lost now there is no case against defendant left
Ahmed and his brother Syed are the property owner for a piece of Land 3 Acre, executed GPA to Krishna during 1998 to look after the land. GPA owner Krishna with help of builder Raghu formed a residential layout around 70 sites and 5 commercial sites. Builder Raghu sold all the residential property to the public exclusively registration are done by GPA owner Krishna during 2002-2003, without involving Ahmed & Syed. Later during 2005, the entire commercial sites were registered to Builder Raghu by GPA Owner Krishna. From 2003 onward, each time Ahmed , his family members and few of his local people will blackmail/ threaten the other residential who is newly constructing house claiming he is owner of land mentioning that GPA owner krishna & builder Raghu cheater him. Each time new residential owner will settle the issue by giving some amount. Before 2016, except one commercial site all commercial property was sold to the public by builder Raghu himself. During 2016, Ahmed & Syed started constructing the compound in one commercial site which builder Raghu is holding and claiming the ownership of that particular site. Raghu (Plaintiff) registered the Original Suit case against Ahmed (Defendant) during 2016. Case is disposed on 3.12.2021 mentioning the nature of Disposal – “Uncontested – With-Drawn”. Order read as “Plaintiff and his counsel Present. Defendant and his counsel absent. Objections to plaintiff memo is taken as nil. Plaintiff and his counsel files a memo of withdrawal. So in view of the above memo, the suit is dismissed as withdrawn” My Question: 1. What is the conclusion? 2. Who has the right to claim the ownership whether plaintiff or Defendant. 3. Whether Plaintiff or Defendant lost the case?
First answer received in 10 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
The suit has been withdrawn by plaintiff in the above case.
No body lost now there is no case against defendant left
1. Since it's uncontested by the defendant, the plaintiff's claim over the property is justified.
2. Plaintiff.
3. Defendant has lost the case, since he missed the opportunity to be heard.
1. The builder Raghu, who has filed the suit, is the plaintiff, it appears that he has withdrawn his suit without going ahead with it for the reasons known to him.
2. It is not known that what is the nature of suit filed by the plaintiff and how the defendant is claiming title to the property, hence no opinion can be given on this without seeing the relevant documents.
3. Neither the plaintiff nor the defendant has lost the case.
The case was withdrawn by the person who has filed it.
Dear Sir,
My answers are as follows:
1. What is the conclusion?
Ans: The nature of of the suit to be looked into. It it was filed only for a relief of Permanent Injunction then
Raghu may file another suit for declaration and other reliefs. Such order is binding upon only against the
defendants of that case2. Who has the right to claim the ownership whether plaintiff or Defendant.
Ans: If the GPA holder enters into any Joint Development Agreement then Raghy the builder will get ownership
as per the terms of such JDA.3. Whether Plaintiff or Defendant lost the case?
Ans: Plaintiff lost his case and it works as res judicata he cannot file similar suit for similar reliefs in future. Get
full fledged legal advise by sharing the copy of plaint and copy of entire memo.
Feedback to Panel Advocate responded to my Question. Out of 6 member responded, 3 members clarified the queries to their extent possible with analysis. The other responded member if not interested there is no point in responding for sake of responding without any analysis and without reading the content completely. As this is paid service people expect minimum explanation with clarity in analysis. I am noticing few members are not responding to the points in my previous query and others public queries also. This is my humble feedback to panel advocate/members who is interested to respond the query with more clarity in explanation & supported with professional content. Follow up question are 1. As per my knowledge, any case will have end based on the judgement verdict (win or defeat) or compromised between the parties. In this case the nature of disposed mentioned as “Uncontested – With-Drawn”. That means defendant is fail to contest and plaintiff has withdrawn? Please clarify the case conclusion. 2. Also it is mentioned that objection for plaintiff memo is taken as NIL. That means defendant is fail to file the objection? Whether there is option for defendant to raise the objection at later stage by filing the fresh case. 3. Based on above information, who has the right to claim the ownership whether plaintiff or Defendant.
It implies plaintiff has with drawn the case . Defendant has not filed his appearance and case was not contested hence words uncontested with drawn
2) from the facts stated by you it appears that Raghu is the owner of property as entire commercial sites were registered in Raghu name by GPA holder in 2005
1. If you do not understand the answers there is no point in blaming advocates giving their answers
From your contention it is clear that the person who has filed the case has withdrawn the case by filing a memo seeking permission from court to withdraw the case, hence the case has passed the orders' withdrawn - uncontested'.
There is no reason to interpret that the defendant failed to contest the case, the plaintiff has withdrawn the suit filed against the defendant, hence the defendant has no case before him to contest or challenge the averments made by the plaintiff.
When there is no case at all then where is the question of win or defeat in the case.
2. This means that the defendant did not express his objection towards plaintiff's decision to withdraw the suit.
The defendants rights are safe and secured.
3. If this suit is for title declaration and possession of property then as the plaintiff is not contesting the title suit, the title and possession of the property is naturally with the defendant, provided the property was already with the defendant otherwise the status of property shall remain the same as it was prior to filing the present suit that has been withdrawn now by the plaintiff.
Dear client,
1) It means that the case has not been attended by both parties.
2) yes
3) it is very subjective
Thank you