Why Ved filed wrong charges on Uma - Page 2

Originally posted by: AnjanaYYZ

Sorry Ziah. Mishri is not the owner of the shop. She was never the owner. The only person who could have sold the property was Bhabho and its clear she had no idea what she was agreeing to. So, the sale to the Toshniwals would not be upheld by any court of law.

Hypothetically ask yourself this. You have a house. It is in your legal name. Can your neighbour or even your child sell it without your authorization? NO. They cannot. Mishri could not sell the store to anyone. Nor could anyone buy it from her. The Rathis are in the right here. It's legally Bhabho's store. Kanak ALWAYS had the law on her side. She just didn't want to risk Bhabho's health by taking the legal route and taking Uma to court. The Law is not with the Toshniwals. Not at all.

The only charges the Toshniwals can bring is against (1) Mishri - a dead girl and (2) Aditya - a missing man and Uma's brother.

In fact - the whole transaction or transfer btwn Uma and Kanak makes no sense. It's Bhabho's store. These hubby-wife are sharing property that doesn't belong to either of them. Bhabho could easily take them both to court and get the store back in her own name. As the transfer from her to Uma was not legal. The transaction there after was not legal either. Now in some countries there is a concept called "adverse possession' - but, even that would not be applicable here because Bhabho always maintained physical possession of the store.

People want to be morally offended by Kanak misleading the Toshniwals for 20 days. For hurting and dumping Uma. That's fair. But, there was no legal impropriety on her part.

Originally posted by: ziah

So you're saying that Uma is at fault for not knowing the fraud of Mishri and Aditya and the court would ignore it?

Bhabho signed those documents (yes, she was not aware but she did sign them) and of course, Mishri had no right to sell it, I know. In such a case, isn't this a bit biased. Just because Uma forcibly married Kanak, it's not right to declare him guilty in everything?

Uma has suffered monetary loss here, he is the victim. Elsewhere, he is not, he is the oppressor.

Think about it, if people were to start selling property and later claim they had no knowledge of it then the buyer's rights would be violated.

Isn't the court going to take this into consideration? I think it will.

Originally posted by: AnjanaYYZ

"Caveat Emptor" - its a latin legal term, which means Buyer Beware. It is the Buyer's responsibility in law to check that they are buying from the correct owner, etc.

So, yes. Court would look at knowledge and intent of the seller not the buyer's loss. Here Bhabho did not know she was selling the shop and did not intend to sell it. The law is not biased. It protects people from being conned away from their property. It is the buyer's task to do the research and ensure they are buying from the correct property owner. Uma didn't follow his own proper business protocol. He left himself vulnerable to the con by Mishri. The court would consider his loss as against Mishri and Aditya not Bhabho.

If the law way the way you think it should be then all the pple uneducated who get conned by rich landowners, cheats would have no legal recourse. Imagine they think they are getting a loan and someone obtains their property instead. This is why nobody can sell another's property without their informed consent. That's why they had the video tape too at the registry office. To prevent fraudulent property sales.

Originally posted by: ziah

Furthermore when Kanak tried to harm Uma's religious beliefs I think it's not only morally offensive but also an iffense that is punishable:
Section 295A, Indian Penal Code: Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs. Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise], insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both

Similarly, Kanak has done things that are punishable by law as well. It's not just morally offensive.

Nevertheless, it was a good discussion. Thanks :)

Originally posted by: ziah

Excuse me Anjana, "if the law works the way I think it should work" I'm not a lawyer. I just feel that this could go both ways. Please don't make this personal.

I just think that this law that protects the seller could harm the buyer. I understand why it's important. But look sometimes your intention in not to do or get involved in fraud.

This is just my opinion which I am allowed to express. But pointing fingers at me for this I'm not proper code of conduct on the forum.

I'm not saying that my way is the only way, if you differ then that's alright, but don't make it like "if the law works like I want it to work". Because that statement feels like an attack at me. This is just a discussion. :)

Originally posted by: manasa.123

I had few questions about Rathi family.

I can understand Kanak frozen state and saying yes.

But We are forgetting one angle.

Both Ved and Vansh (even bhabho) know that Uma wrote half of property to Kanak.

Kanak didn't hide that from anyone.

Then how come Ved being an IPS officer is allowing those charges filed against Uma ?

May be kanak confused the same way how her own family is ignoring all these things and encouraging her to give a report on wrong things.

If she is saying no then it's against her family. She clearly don't want to go back to Uma with confusion. Her existance in her own family being questioned as they emotionally encouraging her to ignore the faults done by her.

My biggest question is why Ved allowed wrong statement being given by Kanak when he clearly knows that Uma wrote half of property legally to Kanak.

Originally posted by: -Rani

I agree, all the other charges filled by Rathi siblings except for the forced marriage are all lies which Kanak didn't even bother to clarify. By their hook or crook attempt, they might be able to get Uma arrested, but never will be able to build a case on him on the other charges.

Kanak has legally taken 50% the property from Uma so there goes her honestly about not taking any property from Uma.

And yes, Kanak Mishan Bhandar was/is rightfully Uma's as Bhabho signed the papers in the presence of not an stranger but her own granddaughter so the sale was totally legal. It was not Uma who was conned by Mishri, but it was Bhabho who was conned by her granddaughter. I too have lawyers in the family so Kanak will be guilty of lying in her FIR report.

If police (Ved) starts to file wrong charges and arrest people then where will am janata go? Ved is a joke in the name of a cop🤢

Originally posted by: deeps07

🤣🤣

uma ne kanak ko ishtdaan diya hein 50% of property for doinh all the 6 tasks of wife as he asked...and she did all that...no third party dealings between him and kanak happened..he knew what he was doing very well.

@ziah..the whole discussion is only fun..its good to know what others thinks of..both urs and anjanas views are valued by everyone..dnt think its any personal attack..we are all friends in this IF world..😳