Page: The sister asks the brothers for their father's inheritance, appears before the court

According to the indictment, the indictment with the indictees is brothers and sisters respectively, the legal heirs of their father's I.C. The latter, as heirs, had left inconsistencies located on the cadastral plot of 286 m2 in the country called the Thatte Fusha.

At Tuesday's session, the plaintiff's author, lawyer Mustaf Kastrati, came with proposals to appoint geodezy experts for the appearance of the supposed plots in the expansion of the indictment, reports Justice Trust.

Initially, lawyer Kastrati said he remains close to the indictment and its request, as well as to the presumption of extending the indictment, where the same proposed that the geodezian expert be appointed to look at and identify the co-ordinating plots.

Lawyer Selim Berisha's authorised party, said it remains close to the current objections and that as far as the indictment party's presumption is concerned, in which it has made the exacting of the request precisely, it has been denied as unequipped, which, according to him, is irregular and unclear.

Lawyer Berisha also rejected the prosecution's authorial proposal for identifying the plots as unequivocal for the fact that according to him, the court must decide whether to expand the indictment objectively in concrete cases of expanding the indictment in the shallow plots.

Besides what's even more important based on the history of these cadastral plots, if we look at the same things carefully, neither do we look at the No. Not even 46/3 as a basic mess has never been counted in the name of indictees, even the first indictees, Sali Qekuić, said lawyer Berisha.

The plaintiff's authorised plan, lawyer Kastrati added that the rejection of the court's expansion is not objectively in terms of reference, which the indictee had mentioned because it has to do with extensiveness in a subjective sense, objective enlargement is always harmonised with experts' opinions because there is no legal way to see such precision, claims lawyer Kastracti.

He further stated that it also relates to objections on whose behalf they were and are the properties which the plaintiff as a family member enjoys the right to inheritance and no one can exclude and whose issue they were and are currently property.

“E have mentioned in the parliament of the 27/9/2021 date, referring to the inheritance's rulings as well as the current situation that history has proved, in terms of other objections, the definition of Saturday 37, 17/18, the same is fair because the plaintiff as heir to this confirmed part of the court's departure in the country has the right to define the part it belongs to, said lawyer Kastracti.

He also said that the plaintiff is willing to reach a compromise agreement on her father's heritage, so that her family can provide a shelter for her to stay when she comes from foreign states. If her family is willing for this offer.

Regarding the offer the plaintiff authorised, the indictees' author said the issue of compromise could be discussed by the parties themselves at the upcoming hearings.

The court then asks the plaintiff's author about the cadastre of 46/3,/5/7,/8,/18/,19, that on whose behalf they figure the same after the subject paperwork based on the history and paperwork presented the same didn't figure out indictees, where he demanded that the same explain regarding the situation.

Lawyer Kastrati stated that clarifications concerning the tribunal's request stand in paragraph 1 of the presumption and the history of ownership as well as the T.nr decision. 88/24 since this court in the process of 43/96 as well.

At that point, the judge of the Besnik Shala case, regarding the prosecution's proposal for expanding the indictment in the objective sense, will decide on separate decisions outside the session, and also on the proposal for the court's release of experts.

The next session was scheduled for January 21, 2022.

Unlike the indictment exercised on October 12, 2018, by plaintiff Z. C, against indictees S, I, Q and VC, is seeking property confirmation worth $9,000.

From this, the plaintiff is seeking to prove to be the owner of the 1/3 legacy of incompatibility and home, which is located in the high schools. /Betimy for Justice