• Case inference

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 So in view of the above memo, the suit is dismissed as withdrawn”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?
Asked 2 years ago in Property Law
Religion: Hindu

First answer received in 10 minutes.

Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.

10 Answers

The suit has been withdrawn by plaintiff in the above case. 

No body lost now there is no case against defendant left

Prashant Nayak
Advocate, Mumbai
31807 Answers
175 Consultations

4.1 on 5.0

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.

Shashidhar S. Sastry
Advocate, Bangalore
5068 Answers
314 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

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 The builder Raghu, who has filed the suit, is the plaintiff, it appears that he has withdrawn his suit without going ahead with it for the reasons known to him.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. 

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
84711 Answers
2172 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

1) case is not lost but withdrawn by Raghu ( plaintiff 

 

2) case does not decide ownership of land 

Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
94520 Answers
7485 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Hi,  in the above case no conclusion was done.  The plaintiff has withdrawn the suit. 

Pradeep Bharathipura
Advocate, Bangalore
5604 Answers
335 Consultations

4.5 on 5.0

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 case

2. 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.

Kishan Dutt Kalaskar
Advocate, Bangalore
6135 Answers
483 Consultations

4.8 on 5.0

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

Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
94520 Answers
7485 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

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. 

 

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
84711 Answers
2172 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Dear client, 

1) It means that the case has not been attended by both parties. 

2) yes 

3) it is very subjective 

Thank you

Anik Miu
Advocate, Bangalore
8742 Answers
109 Consultations

4.7 on 5.0

In above case as the pliant is withdrawn no case is made out on the said plaint. 

Prashant Nayak
Advocate, Mumbai
31807 Answers
175 Consultations

4.1 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
  Ask a lawyer