Chinangi And Shaga Complaints & Reviews
Janachaitanya venture Fake GPA survey number 94,95/2,95/3
| Address: BDL COLONY |
Injapur survey number 94/95 Janachaitanya venture Fake GPA REGD.POST WITH.ACK.DUE Date:[protected] To, 01) Janachaitanya Housing (P) Ltd, Zainab Commercial Complex, 3rd Floor, Above Margadarsi Chit Fund, Ameerpet, Hyderabad, Telangana[protected] Janachaitanya Housing (P) Ltd, No 5, 1st Ln, Bharathpet, Arundelpet, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh 522002
03) Sushma Devi Agarwal w/o Ravinder Kumar Agarwal, R/o. H.No-11-6-67/1, Pochamma Bagh, Near Pochamma Temple, Saroornagar, Hyderabad.
L E G A L N O T I C E
Under instructions of our client 01) Koshika Kumar S/o Koshika Bixapathy, Aged about 35 years, Occ: Pvt.Job, R/o Thorrur Village, Hayath Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad, Telangana, we are issuing the following legal notice. 01) Our clients father namely Koshik Bixapathy was owner of the land along with other heirs of three branches namely, Shinangi, Shaga and Gorige families having inherited the same from their ancestors. Our clients state that their grandfather K.Beerappa became Pattedar of said land admeasuring an extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3, by virtue of inheritance from ancestors. In this regard it is relevant to state that four branches of families inherited the said extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3 of Injapur Village from their ancestors in equal shares. The four branches of families are Shaga Jangaiah and others, Koshika Beerappa and others, Sinangi Venkataiah and others and Gorige Laxmaiah. The four branches of families have been in joint possession and enjoyment of said land. Our clients state that K.Beerappa and his son K.Bixapathy along with others are coparceners of their ¼ share out total extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3 of land. 02) Our client further states that our client came to know that his father K.Bixpathy along with other three branches of families executed a registered GPA dated 10/03/1992 bearing document no.231 Of 1992 in favour of Janachaithanya Housing Private Limited in respect of the said extent Ac.34.20 of land allegedly authorising the sale of said property. The said Janachaithanya Housing Private Limited on the basis of such alleged GPA doc.no.231 Of 1992, dated 10/03/1992 executed a sale deed document no.3172 dated 27/08/1997 in respect of Plot No.394, admeasuring 505 Sq.Yrds in Sy.No.94 of Injapur village, Hayath Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in favour of one J Pandu Ranga. Subsequently the said ________ also sold the same to one B Mohan Rao vide sale deed document no.3173 dated 27/08/1997. He also sold to third one of you vide sale deed document no.3487 dated 16/03/2019. Our client states that the above alleged sale deed and its link documents are invalid, sham nominal and void ab-intio due to following reasons. i) The GPA was allegedly executed by K.Bixapathy in his personal capacity but not as a kartha of Hindu undivided Joint family. Our client being co-coparceners are not parties to such GPA dated 10/03/1992. The said sale deed dated 3487/2019 is therefore not binding upon my client. ii) The said K.Bixapathy died on 29/06/1994. The GPA dated 10/03/1992 stood revoked upon demise of K.Bixapathy. The coparceners interest of K.Bixapathy in the above said land devolved upon other surviving coparceners including Our client. Our client being minor at the relevant point of time such coparcenaring interest of our client is not alienable by the alleged GPA holders. iii) The agency created under GPA dated 10/03/1992 by K.Bixapathy is not valid as the same is not related to his undivided coparcenery interest in the property. In the absence of any valid transfer of title of the coparceners, the alleged sale deed dated 10/03/1992 executed by GPA holders is not valid. Our clients state that your alleged sale deed document no.3487 dated 16/03/2019 and its link documents are therefore perse illegal and void. As one of the coparceners cannot deliver possession of the property. The question of delivery of possession under the alleged sale deed dated 16/03/2019 does not arise. Moreover the subject land remained as agriculture and was never converted in to non-agriculture. In the absence of conversion of subject land in to non-agriculture purpose the claims set up by you in respect of such non-existing plot is not valid. Our client has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of above said land as absolute owners. Our client further state that in the alleged GPA dated 10/03/1992 boundaries are not mentioned as such the said GPA is incomplete and defective document. Further our client states that the Sy.No.94 is only having Ac.9.00 Gts but on his verification it is found that 250 documents were executed by first and second of you which is of more than Ac.15.00 Gts and it is wrongly mentioned in lay out prepared by first and second of you there by cheating the purchasers. The available land only Ac.9.00 Gts in Sy.No.94. In the above stated circumstances you are hereby called upon to desist yourself from making any frivolous claims in respect of such non existing plot, failing which our clients will be constrained to initiate appropriate proceedings holding you responsible for all costs and consequences arising thereof.
RAMADASU Advocate
[protected]
03) Sushma Devi Agarwal w/o Ravinder Kumar Agarwal, R/o. H.No-11-6-67/1, Pochamma Bagh, Near Pochamma Temple, Saroornagar, Hyderabad.
L E G A L N O T I C E
Under instructions of our client 01) Koshika Kumar S/o Koshika Bixapathy, Aged about 35 years, Occ: Pvt.Job, R/o Thorrur Village, Hayath Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad, Telangana, we are issuing the following legal notice. 01) Our clients father namely Koshik Bixapathy was owner of the land along with other heirs of three branches namely, Shinangi, Shaga and Gorige families having inherited the same from their ancestors. Our clients state that their grandfather K.Beerappa became Pattedar of said land admeasuring an extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3, by virtue of inheritance from ancestors. In this regard it is relevant to state that four branches of families inherited the said extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3 of Injapur Village from their ancestors in equal shares. The four branches of families are Shaga Jangaiah and others, Koshika Beerappa and others, Sinangi Venkataiah and others and Gorige Laxmaiah. The four branches of families have been in joint possession and enjoyment of said land. Our clients state that K.Beerappa and his son K.Bixapathy along with others are coparceners of their ¼ share out total extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3 of land. 02) Our client further states that our client came to know that his father K.Bixpathy along with other three branches of families executed a registered GPA dated 10/03/1992 bearing document no.231 Of 1992 in favour of Janachaithanya Housing Private Limited in respect of the said extent Ac.34.20 of land allegedly authorising the sale of said property. The said Janachaithanya Housing Private Limited on the basis of such alleged GPA doc.no.231 Of 1992, dated 10/03/1992 executed a sale deed document no.3172 dated 27/08/1997 in respect of Plot No.394, admeasuring 505 Sq.Yrds in Sy.No.94 of Injapur village, Hayath Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in favour of one J Pandu Ranga. Subsequently the said ________ also sold the same to one B Mohan Rao vide sale deed document no.3173 dated 27/08/1997. He also sold to third one of you vide sale deed document no.3487 dated 16/03/2019. Our client states that the above alleged sale deed and its link documents are invalid, sham nominal and void ab-intio due to following reasons. i) The GPA was allegedly executed by K.Bixapathy in his personal capacity but not as a kartha of Hindu undivided Joint family. Our client being co-coparceners are not parties to such GPA dated 10/03/1992. The said sale deed dated 3487/2019 is therefore not binding upon my client. ii) The said K.Bixapathy died on 29/06/1994. The GPA dated 10/03/1992 stood revoked upon demise of K.Bixapathy. The coparceners interest of K.Bixapathy in the above said land devolved upon other surviving coparceners including Our client. Our client being minor at the relevant point of time such coparcenaring interest of our client is not alienable by the alleged GPA holders. iii) The agency created under GPA dated 10/03/1992 by K.Bixapathy is not valid as the same is not related to his undivided coparcenery interest in the property. In the absence of any valid transfer of title of the coparceners, the alleged sale deed dated 10/03/1992 executed by GPA holders is not valid. Our clients state that your alleged sale deed document no.3487 dated 16/03/2019 and its link documents are therefore perse illegal and void. As one of the coparceners cannot deliver possession of the property. The question of delivery of possession under the alleged sale deed dated 16/03/2019 does not arise. Moreover the subject land remained as agriculture and was never converted in to non-agriculture. In the absence of conversion of subject land in to non-agriculture purpose the claims set up by you in respect of such non-existing plot is not valid. Our client has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of above said land as absolute owners. Our client further state that in the alleged GPA dated 10/03/1992 boundaries are not mentioned as such the said GPA is incomplete and defective document. Further our client states that the Sy.No.94 is only having Ac.9.00 Gts but on his verification it is found that 250 documents were executed by first and second of you which is of more than Ac.15.00 Gts and it is wrongly mentioned in lay out prepared by first and second of you there by cheating the purchasers. The available land only Ac.9.00 Gts in Sy.No.94. In the above stated circumstances you are hereby called upon to desist yourself from making any frivolous claims in respect of such non existing plot, failing which our clients will be constrained to initiate appropriate proceedings holding you responsible for all costs and consequences arising thereof.
RAMADASU Advocate
[protected]
Helpful
Found this helpful?
Write a comment
Post your Comment
Janachaitanya venture Fake GPA
| Address: #12-1-317, LAXMI NAGAR |
Injapur survey number 94/95 Janachaitanya venture Fake GPA REGD.POST WITH.ACK.DUE
Date:[protected]
To,
01) Janachaitanya Housing (P) Ltd, Zainab Commercial Complex, 3rd Floor, Above Margadarsi Chit Fund, Ameerpet, Hyderabad, Telangana[protected] Janachaitanya Housing (P) Ltd, No 5, 1st Ln, Bharathpet, Arundelpet, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh[protected]
Sushma Devi Agarwal w/o Ravinder Kumar Agarwal, R/o. H.No-11-6-67/1, Pochamma Bagh, Near Pochamma Temple, Saroornagar, Hyderabad.
L E G A L N O T I C E
Under instructions of our client 01) Koshika Kumar S/o Koshika Bixapathy, Aged about 35 years, Occ: Pvt.Job, R/o Thorrur Village, Hayath Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad, Telangana, we are issuing the following legal notice. 01) Our clients father namely Koshik Bixapathy was owner of the land along with other heirs of three branches namely, Shinangi, Shaga and Gorige families having inherited the same from their ancestors. Our clients state that their grandfather K.Beerappa became Pattedar of said land admeasuring an extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3, by virtue of inheritance from ancestors. In this regard it is relevant to state that four branches of families inherited the said extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3 of Injapur Village from their ancestors in equal shares. The four branches of families are Shaga Jangaiah and others, Koshika Beerappa and others, Sinangi Venkataiah and others and Gorige Laxmaiah. The four branches of families have been in joint possession and enjoyment of said land. Our clients state that K.Beerappa and his son K.Bixapathy along with others are coparceners of their ¼ share out total extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3 of land. 02) Our client further states that our client came to know that his father K.Bixpathy along with other three branches of families executed a registered GPA dated 10/03/1992 bearing document no.231 Of 1992 in favour of Janachaithanya Housing Private Limited in respect of the said extent Ac.34.20 of land allegedly authorising the sale of said property. The said Janachaithanya Housing Private Limited on the basis of such alleged GPA doc.no.231 Of 1992, dated 10/03/1992 executed a sale deed document no.3172 dated 27/08/1997 in respect of Plot No.394, admeasuring 505 Sq.Yrds in Sy.No.94 of Injapur village, Hayath Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in favour of one J Pandu Ranga. Subsequently the said ________ also sold the same to one B Mohan Rao vide sale deed document no.3173 dated 27/08/1997. He also sold to third one of you vide sale deed document no.3487 dated 16/03/2019. Our client states that the above alleged sale deed and its link documents are invalid, sham nominal and void ab-intio due to following reasons. i) The GPA was allegedly executed by K.Bixapathy in his personal capacity but not as a kartha of Hindu undivided Joint family. Our client being co-coparceners are not parties to such GPA dated 10/03/1992. The said sale deed dated 3487/2019 is therefore not binding upon my client. ii) The said K.Bixapathy died on 29/06/1994. The GPA dated 10/03/1992 stood revoked upon demise of K.Bixapathy. The coparceners interest of K.Bixapathy in the above said land devolved upon other surviving coparceners including Our client. Our client being minor at the relevant point of time such coparcenaring interest of our client is not alienable by the alleged GPA holders. iii) The agency created under GPA dated 10/03/1992 by K.Bixapathy is not valid as the same is not related to his undivided coparcenery interest in the property. In the absence of any valid transfer of title of the coparceners, the alleged sale deed dated 10/03/1992 executed by GPA holders is not valid. Our clients state that your alleged sale deed document no.3487 dated 16/03/2019 and its link documents are therefore perse illegal and void. As one of the coparceners cannot deliver possession of the property. The question of delivery of possession under the alleged sale deed dated 16/03/2019 does not arise. Moreover the subject land remained as agriculture and was never converted in to non-agriculture. In the absence of conversion of subject land in to non-agriculture purpose the claims set up by you in respect of such non-existing plot is not valid. Our client has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of above said land as absolute owners. Our client further state that in the alleged GPA dated 10/03/1992 boundaries are not mentioned as such the said GPA is incomplete and defective document. Further our client states that the Sy.No.94 is only having Ac.9.00 Gts but on his verification it is found that 250 documents were executed by first and second of you which is of more than Ac.15.00 Gts and it is wrongly mentioned in lay out prepared by first and second of you there by cheating the purchasers. The available land only Ac.9.00 Gts in Sy.No.94. In the above stated circumstances you are hereby called upon to desist yourself from making any frivolous claims in respect of such non existing plot, failing which our clients will be constrained to initiate appropriate proceedings holding you responsible for all costs and consequences arising thereof. RAMADASU MOTE Advocate
Date:[protected]
To,
01) Janachaitanya Housing (P) Ltd, Zainab Commercial Complex, 3rd Floor, Above Margadarsi Chit Fund, Ameerpet, Hyderabad, Telangana[protected] Janachaitanya Housing (P) Ltd, No 5, 1st Ln, Bharathpet, Arundelpet, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh[protected]
Sushma Devi Agarwal w/o Ravinder Kumar Agarwal, R/o. H.No-11-6-67/1, Pochamma Bagh, Near Pochamma Temple, Saroornagar, Hyderabad.
L E G A L N O T I C E
Under instructions of our client 01) Koshika Kumar S/o Koshika Bixapathy, Aged about 35 years, Occ: Pvt.Job, R/o Thorrur Village, Hayath Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad, Telangana, we are issuing the following legal notice. 01) Our clients father namely Koshik Bixapathy was owner of the land along with other heirs of three branches namely, Shinangi, Shaga and Gorige families having inherited the same from their ancestors. Our clients state that their grandfather K.Beerappa became Pattedar of said land admeasuring an extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3, by virtue of inheritance from ancestors. In this regard it is relevant to state that four branches of families inherited the said extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3 of Injapur Village from their ancestors in equal shares. The four branches of families are Shaga Jangaiah and others, Koshika Beerappa and others, Sinangi Venkataiah and others and Gorige Laxmaiah. The four branches of families have been in joint possession and enjoyment of said land. Our clients state that K.Beerappa and his son K.Bixapathy along with others are coparceners of their ¼ share out total extent of Ac.46.31 Guntas in Sy.No.94, 95/2 and 95/3 of land. 02) Our client further states that our client came to know that his father K.Bixpathy along with other three branches of families executed a registered GPA dated 10/03/1992 bearing document no.231 Of 1992 in favour of Janachaithanya Housing Private Limited in respect of the said extent Ac.34.20 of land allegedly authorising the sale of said property. The said Janachaithanya Housing Private Limited on the basis of such alleged GPA doc.no.231 Of 1992, dated 10/03/1992 executed a sale deed document no.3172 dated 27/08/1997 in respect of Plot No.394, admeasuring 505 Sq.Yrds in Sy.No.94 of Injapur village, Hayath Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in favour of one J Pandu Ranga. Subsequently the said ________ also sold the same to one B Mohan Rao vide sale deed document no.3173 dated 27/08/1997. He also sold to third one of you vide sale deed document no.3487 dated 16/03/2019. Our client states that the above alleged sale deed and its link documents are invalid, sham nominal and void ab-intio due to following reasons. i) The GPA was allegedly executed by K.Bixapathy in his personal capacity but not as a kartha of Hindu undivided Joint family. Our client being co-coparceners are not parties to such GPA dated 10/03/1992. The said sale deed dated 3487/2019 is therefore not binding upon my client. ii) The said K.Bixapathy died on 29/06/1994. The GPA dated 10/03/1992 stood revoked upon demise of K.Bixapathy. The coparceners interest of K.Bixapathy in the above said land devolved upon other surviving coparceners including Our client. Our client being minor at the relevant point of time such coparcenaring interest of our client is not alienable by the alleged GPA holders. iii) The agency created under GPA dated 10/03/1992 by K.Bixapathy is not valid as the same is not related to his undivided coparcenery interest in the property. In the absence of any valid transfer of title of the coparceners, the alleged sale deed dated 10/03/1992 executed by GPA holders is not valid. Our clients state that your alleged sale deed document no.3487 dated 16/03/2019 and its link documents are therefore perse illegal and void. As one of the coparceners cannot deliver possession of the property. The question of delivery of possession under the alleged sale deed dated 16/03/2019 does not arise. Moreover the subject land remained as agriculture and was never converted in to non-agriculture. In the absence of conversion of subject land in to non-agriculture purpose the claims set up by you in respect of such non-existing plot is not valid. Our client has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of above said land as absolute owners. Our client further state that in the alleged GPA dated 10/03/1992 boundaries are not mentioned as such the said GPA is incomplete and defective document. Further our client states that the Sy.No.94 is only having Ac.9.00 Gts but on his verification it is found that 250 documents were executed by first and second of you which is of more than Ac.15.00 Gts and it is wrongly mentioned in lay out prepared by first and second of you there by cheating the purchasers. The available land only Ac.9.00 Gts in Sy.No.94. In the above stated circumstances you are hereby called upon to desist yourself from making any frivolous claims in respect of such non existing plot, failing which our clients will be constrained to initiate appropriate proceedings holding you responsible for all costs and consequences arising thereof. RAMADASU MOTE Advocate
Helpful
Found this helpful?
Write a comment