Will Unfair - Page 2

I agree with the view that this is really not about ownership, but about guardianship and responsibility - the word was used again and again in the episode.

Why it is unfair?? Just because it is not given to Pari it does not make it unfair. Firstly it is completely Manav's property not a inherited property of his ancestors. So according to law he can give it to anyone even for charity. So there is no question of fairness and unfairness arises because no children has right on father's earned property according to law if the father does not think so. So it is Manav's property and he can give it anyone.

I agree with what nikitagmc and other have said about it being a guardianship or overseer position of the business, not the giving of the estate. In fact Manav said pretty much just that. He said they would all now have to prove themselves to see how it will all be down the road.

for me wat manav did was rite. it was his prperty and its his choice whether he give it to anki or anybody else. nobody has rite to object his decision. n manav has given chance to everyone, he did gave education to all of tem,tey r not illterate to quarrel for there haq(which was never their). it was their choice to join bussiness n help manav. he didnt insisted anybody.

rightfully the property would have gone to soham... if he had been with manav archana 20 years back... but he hasn't been with them... the others including teju were born and brought up in a comfortable and luxurious life... but neither has soham nor his children got anything from the deskmukh clan.. they had been fending for their lives since the start... manav wants to right the wrong done to soham...it is what he said when he was giving the speech about who deserves to get the property...yeah teju is a good choice... but then again it is a single person who the property would go to... ankita on the other hand... has her four younger siblings to look after... if teju was chosen... and she wanted to help soham's kids.. they would not agree to it... while with ankita... they won't have a problem... choosing ankita would also mean that she would take some of the biggest possible decisions which require a lot of courage... and ankita time and again has proven that she can take hard decisions...and right now.. he named her as his heir... until he dies... the property isn't entirely in ankita's name... manav can revoke it whenever he wants to...

Originally posted by: muse10

I agree with the view that this is really not about ownership, but about guardianship and responsibility - the word was used again and again in the episode.

Especially because as a heart patient Manav has to think of the possibility of his sudden passing, he has to hand his company over to someone who will not be selfish. Sachin and Pari have proved repeatedly how horribly selfish they are. Just within the episode about the will, at first Sachin's wife (on whose guidance he works) and Pari, asked Manav to rest. How fake their concern was apparent as soon as Manav announced his decision. They did not care a hoot about Manav's delicate health and started complaining loud in angry voices. They certainly would not be fair to others if the responsibility was given to them.

Teju was the most logical choice. But she has been shown to be caring most for Manav at the personal level, which is something he needs at the moment. That might be the reason for keeping Teju out of it. This decision seems more a matter of trust rather than anything else.

But what is interesting to me in the story is that two persons who grew up with Manav and Archana (who are shown as models for not being selfish), Sachin and Pari (who also had her own mother who was not selfish at all) - turned out to be such selfish individuals. By contrast, Ankita, who grew up without anyone to offer her moral direction, developed herself into a responsible human being without selfishness. I find it very interesting.

Muse - I think Ankita is being "mahaan-ized" bc she is the lead. And of course Ankita Lokande is playing the role. Pari and Sachin seemed to have nice upbringings also. Of course they've had their share of "parental issues" but who hasn't? That was their struggle and Ankita had her own struggles. But apparently the CVs have tried to evoke sympathy and understanding to Ankitas struggles as opposed to Pari, Sachin & others in the show. Everyone else just seems to turn evil once struggles come while Ankita only scarfices. Another thing - the rich always seem to be spoiled or ungrateful when they are supporting cast - think Ovi, Vandus inlaw fam (forgot their names) The leads whether rich or poor are self scarficing - think Arman, Arvi, Ankita etc.

Supporting casts stories had ever been developed. Naren and Pari's love was never developed past what they had in London. Surely, a man and woman can't change their entire way of life (pari withdrawn / naren insanity ) if their love was just superficial. Only when Naren was with Ankita did he have devlopment. Same with Teju - we know nothing of this character besides the fact she teases her sisinlaw and drove a cab or whatever.

Either they're dark characters to make lead look good or they're used as props to oooh and aaa in the chawl fights.

Originally posted by: soniiyaa

Muse - I think Ankita is being "mahaan-ized" bc she is the lead. And of course Ankita Lokande is playing the role. Pari and Sachin seemed to have nice upbringings also. Of course they've had their share of "parental issues" but who hasn't? That was their struggle and Ankita had her own struggles. But apparently the CVs have tried to evoke sympathy and understanding to Ankitas struggles as opposed to Pari, Sachin & others in the show. Everyone else just seems to turn evil once struggles come while Ankita only scarfices. Another thing - the rich always seem to be spoiled or ungrateful when they are supporting cast - think Ovi, Vandus inlaw fam (forgot their names) The leads whether rich or poor are self scarficing - think Arman, Arvi, Ankita etc.

Supporting casts stories had ever been developed. Naren and Pari's love was never developed past what they had in London. Surely, a man and woman can't change their entire way of life (pari withdrawn / naren insanity ) if their love was just superficial. Only when Naren was with Ankita did he have devlopment. Same with Teju - we know nothing of this character besides the fact she teases her sisinlaw and drove a cab or whatever.

Either they're dark characters to make lead look good or they're used as props to oooh and aaa in the chawl fights.

first of all lemme say that just coz sachin and pari worked so hard for this company does not make them deserving to get the highest post. teju is def deserving. in fact she is the only one who actually worked hard for this company without any greed for company unlike pari and sachin. it is quite clear that pari and sachin were always expecting to control this company some day instead of thinking more about giving their contribution to the family and doing something for their parents. right now how they reacted proves my point. ovi and pia are not in the picture so i cannot comment on that. pari and sachin were always more career oriented rather than family oriented. in the situations where they had to pick between the two they have always chosen the former. moreover it is the present that matters and right now pari and sachin are down right disgusting. pari is a liar, coward and a bitch. sachin is with neena who has no family values and here for money. moreover since soham came the way sachin behaved with him and manav showed his true colors. so far soham killing gauri is concerned, that is a different issue coz cvs never clearly gave full back story. the way sachin behaved had nothing to do with gauri. it was abt the property. if sachin is so weak that he cannot handle his insecurities how is he capable to handle a company? pari who is such a liar and such a coward has no morals whosoever. how is she suppose to be fair and strong to run a company when she herself lack morals in her personal life?

Originally posted by: jjj123

Why it is unfair?? Just because it is not given to Pari it does not make it unfair. Firstly it is completely Manav's property not a inherited property of his ancestors. So according to law he can give it to anyone even for charity. So there is no question of fairness and unfairness arises because no children has right on father's earned property according to law if the father does not think so. So it is Manav's property and he can give it anyone.

its not unfair ...

bcz first of thing sachin betrayal them after getting support of manav every time ...so giving him property may be unfair to other bcz he could capture all and will be not give anything to any one and now he is a puppy of her wife...

soham never deserve the post of md...

mansi and shsank never wanted property and also they have not any buisness knowledge ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

prasant also a fresher and student ...

others are kid...

now arman also realized that pari's behaviour is changed ...and something is fishy in her...so she lost faith ...

naren could not be hair when other legel hair is present...

ovi and pia are well established and self-made person...when ovi needed them they are not for her and she made her and her daughter alone ...and she enough rich and her daughter is simple and their profession also different and most important thing they hv not any intrest in money whatever they show in pr...if manav will be not give anything to them for them its not matter,,,,,,,,,,,


and only teju and ankita left ...in between them md post could given more benefit to ankita include ing every one if ankita will be get this...arman knows ankita's reality also ... and also others right is safe with ankita...ankita has a mission when teju has not any...so the decission of manav is 100% perfect...