Party: Judge: Document number: Taikang County People's Court.
Plaintiff Li Xiling.
The plaintiff Han is the son.
The plaintiff Han Yu is the eldest daughter of Li Xiling.
The plaintiff Han Na is the second daughter of Li Xiling.
4. Han Silin, the agent entrusted by the plaintiff, is the husband of the plaintiff and the father of Han, Han Yu and Han Na.
Defendant State-owned Taikang Farm.
Wang Gangying, the legal representative, is the director of the field.
Authorized Agent: Wang Changyu, lawyer of Henan Yutai Law Firm.
The plaintiff, Han, Han Yu, Han Na and the defendant state-owned Taikang Farm dispute case, after the court accepted, formed a collegial panel according to law. First, public hearings were held on August 23rd, 2007 and on October 7th, 2007/KLOC-0. On June 26th, 2008, the Japanese court made a civil ruling (2007)No. 179 of Taimin Zi Chu, and ruled that the claims of the plaintiff, Han, Angel Han and Han Na were rejected. The plaintiff refused to accept the appeal to Zhoukou Intermediate People's Court. After examination, Zhoukou Intermediate People's Court held that the four appellants had a direct interest in the case, had clear defendants, had specific claims and were under the jurisdiction of the sued people's court. Zhoukou Intermediate People's Court ruled: (1) The civil rulingNo. 179 of Taikang County People's Court (2007) was revoked. (2) Designate Taikang County People's Court to continue the trial. On March 23, 20 10, our court held another public hearing to hear the case. The plaintiff's entrusted agent Han Silin, the defendant Wang Gangying, the legal representative of Taikang County State Farm, and the entrusted agent attended the proceedings. The case has now been closed.
Philip Burkart told me that1on March 20th, 993, the plaintiff's husband, Han Slim, was appointed as the deputy director of the state-owned Taikang Farm, and the family's household registration was moved to the farm. During the land contract adjustment of 1995, the four plaintiffs obtained the contract management right of 14 mu of cultivated land, which lasted for more than four years. In 2005, when the defendant re-contracted the land, it unreasonably recovered the contractual management right of the four plaintiffs to 14 mu of cultivated land, which seriously violated the legitimate rights and interests of the four plaintiffs. 4. The plaintiff has repeatedly claimed rights from the defendant, but failed. They appealed to the people's court, requesting the defendant to return 14 mu of cultivated land contracted by the four plaintiffs and related economic losses 18725 yuan, or to compensate each of the four plaintiffs at one time.
Taikang Farm, the state-owned defendant, argued that the claims of the four plaintiffs were untrue, and that the four plaintiffs had permanent residence in Houxi Village of Banqiao and owned contracted land. The plaintiff's claim does not fall within the scope of civil litigation adjustment of the people's court and should be handled by the relevant departments. In the case of 1995, the plaintiff's husband, Han Silin, used his power to intercept 14 mu of cultivated land for himself, causing public outrage. In 2005, the farm recovered its privately occupied 14 mu of cultivated land according to the superior documents and relevant regulations, which was reasonable and legal. Therefore, the people's court is requested to ascertain the facts according to law and reject the claims of the four plaintiffs or the claims of the four plaintiffs.
It was found through trial that the plaintiff's husband, Han Silin, was transferred to the defendant's state-owned Taikang Farm on 1993 as the deputy director, and the plaintiff and his children (the other three plaintiffs), Han Yu and Han Na, also moved to the state-owned Taikang Farm with their household registration. In the process of land contract adjustment of state-owned Taikang Farm 195, the four plaintiffs obtained the contractual management right of 14 mu of cultivated land. In 2005, when the defendant State-owned Taikang Farm contracted the land again, according to the spirit of Taikang County Agricultural Bureau document TYZ (2005) No.32 "Taikang County Farm Land Reform Implementation Plan", the land contractual management rights of the four plaintiffs were cancelled, and the 14 mu of cultivated land contracted by the four plaintiffs was also contracted to others according to relevant regulations.
4. The plaintiff entrusted his agent, Hanslim, to leave the farm on 1997, and now he is the deputy discipline inspector of Taikang County Construction Committee and the deputy director of the gas office. Li Xiling and other four plaintiffs moved into the state-owned Taikang Farm from 1993, and only lived in the farm for a short time during the busy farming season. The four plaintiffs rarely went to the defendant's state-owned Taikang Farm from 1998. Han Silin and his four plaintiffs contracted land for five people in Houxi Administrative Village, Banqiao, where the original household registration was located, and have been cultivating and receiving direct grain subsidies. Before 2008, the head of the household was Han Slim, later changed to Han Xiang Bin. The number of acres and the amount of direct grain subsidies have not changed.
Before the court accepted the case, Han Silin, the special authorized agent of the four plaintiffs, went to Taikang County Letters and Calls Bureau to petition on March 28, 2007, and was received by Liu Qingsen, then secretary of Taikang County Party Committee, accompanied by Wang, director of letters and calls. Han Silin reflected that his children were in the state-run Taikang farm, and their original land was transferred to other races in 2005, demanding that farmers be treated equally according to the policy. The leaders' instructions shall be investigated and handled by the Agriculture Bureau and reported to Liu Shuji within fifteen days. Taikang County Agriculture Bureau set up an investigation team with Cheng Xiqin, deputy director, as the team leader and An Jianzhong and Sun Xun as the team members. Through investigation and evidence collection, first, an investigation report on the request of Hanslim's family and children for contracted land. The report suggests: 1, criticize and educate Han Silin's family and children. 2. The farm and Hanslim should further verify and clarify the accounting issues. 3. Close the case. Second, the conclusion materials about Hanslim's reflection on the problem of family members' children contracting land are as follows: first, according to the implementation plan of farm land reform in Taikang County in 2005; Iii. methods and measures 1. Anyone who is in arrears with farm debts must pay off his debts before he can participate in this reform. 3,7 acres of land for each regular employee. "The children of members of the Hanslim family do not enjoy the land rights of the farm in Taikang County. Second, Han Silin's organizational relationship:1At the end of 997, the farm leader decided to let Han Silin leave the field temporarily to ask for accounts. Now Hanslim has been working in the County Construction Committee, handling its organizational relationship in time and transferring to a new unit. Third, Han Silin paid the contracted land to the farm: During the land reform of the farm in 2005, Han Silin's children asked for the contracted land and paid the contracted land to the farm in advance. After the implementation, their children do not enjoy the right to land distribution on the farm, and their contracted funds are fully returned by the farm. Fourth, Han Silin's accounting problem: According to Han Silin, the farm owed him 6,806.2 yuan, but Yao, then the farm accountant, proposed that Han Silin owed 3,599 yuan, and Zhang Liugen, now the accountant, provided Han Silin with 3,080.46 yuan. As for the accounting problem, Hanslin should solve it with the farm and two associations. Taikang County Agriculture Bureau, May 2007 15. After the working group consulted with Han Silin on this conclusion material, Han Silin wrote to the working group, "agreeing with the following three conclusions made by the Agriculture Bureau: 1. Regarding the land contract of my family members in 2005, the children of Hanslim family members do not enjoy the right to land distribution on the farm; Second, regarding the organizational relationship of Han's self-cultivation, the Agricultural Bureau instructed the farm to transfer the relationship within a time limit; Third, when Han Silin adjusted the farm land contract in 2005, his children paid 3,200 yuan in advance. The agriculture bureau urged the farm to return in full. Note: 1. The text of the three conclusions made by the Agriculture Bureau on May 15, 2007 guarantees Han's self-cultivation. 2. Under the condition that the farm guarantees to implement the above two or three conclusions of the Agricultural Bureau within a time limit, I promise that there will be no land contracting and economic disputes with the farm in the future. Han slim 2007
May15 "; Hanslim gave a sign to the working group of the Agriculture Bureau, which read: "The sign has received the land contract payment of 3,200 yuan in advance from the farm in Taikang County (Xinzhuang) in 2005. Three letters of introduction on organizational relations, Han Silin, June 2007 14. "Korea cultivate one's morality and then go back on our word, it formed a dispute and brought it to our hospital.
The above facts are proved by the original and defendant's statements, witness testimony, submitted evidence and court transcripts.
Our court believes that the defendant's state-owned Taikang farm is state-owned, and the land of the state-owned farm is state-owned assets, which is the means of production on which the majority of farm workers depend for survival. In case 4, it is an objective fact that the plaintiff's household registration is in the defendant's place, but whether he has the status of a farm worker cannot be confirmed because he has not submitted the due evidence. Moreover, the cultivated land of 195 14 mu contracted by the four plaintiffs in the defendant expired in 2005, and the original land contract has been terminated. In 2005, according to the spirit of document No.32 (2005) of Taikang County Agriculture Bureau, the defendant re-contracted the land, but the four plaintiffs failed to contract the land. The agents of the four plaintiffs petitioned Taikang County Letters and Calls Bureau, and the relevant leaders instructed the Agriculture Bureau to investigate and deal with it. Taikang County Agriculture Bureau organized relevant personnel to set up an investigation team, and formed the "Concluding Materials on Han Silin's Reflection on the Land Contracting Problem of Family Members' Children". Han Silin admitted it and issued a written opinion and receipt. As the husband of the plaintiff and the father of three other plaintiffs, Hanslin reached an agreement with the defendant and its higher authorities. The intention is true, free from coercion and misunderstanding, in line with the law and should be confirmed. Therefore, the four plaintiffs' claims lack factual evidence and legal basis, and our court will not support them. In accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 2 of Article 80, Paragraph 2 of Article 106, Paragraph 1 of Article 117 of the General Principles of Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), and Articles 15 and 16 of People's Republic of China (PRC) Land and Land Management Law, the judgment is as follows:
Reject the claims of the plaintiff, Han, Han Yu and Han Na.
The acceptance fee of this case is 100 yuan, which shall be borne by the four plaintiffs.
If you refuse to accept this judgment, you can submit an appeal to our court within 15 days from the date of service of the judgment, and submit copies according to the number of the other parties, and appeal to the Intermediate People's Court of Zhoukou City, Henan Province.
Judge Cheng Xiye
Judge Cheng Haigang
Judge Han Bing.
20 10 September 15
Bookkeepers get rich by drinking.