Will Unfair - Page 2

Posted: 9 years ago
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.
Posted: 9 years ago
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.
Posted: 9 years ago
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.
While at first i thought it was odd to choose Ankita, really she's the most logical in many ways and has  good business sense. Teju was my first thought like many of you, she's honest, fair, loves her family, but I didn't know she had worked for the company. That came as a surprise to me.

But of course it is for the purpose of advancing the story so ...what can we do except go along for the ride like someone said. ðŸ˜†
Posted: 9 years ago
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.
Posted: 9 years ago
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...
Posted: 9 years ago
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.
Posted: 9 years ago
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.
 

Hi Soniiyaa

I agree with you that as the lead character, Ankita is being shown in positive light.  
And I am not even commenting on the upbringing or parenting issue - my comment is really on how the CVs for this show develop characters in surprising ways. This particular contrast in characters is especially interesting because Ankita's father, Soham, who was raised by a gunda could never get away from that curse. Purvi, raised by Ankita, was always ready to sacrifice. But in this generation they have turned the tables - that is what I mean.

As for making central but less important (non-lead) characters look grey in order to show the lead characters in glowing light is nothing new. This has been going on in PR since long (I guess that might also be the case in other shows). 

I really like the way they have developed Ankita's character - gentle but strong when needed. Ankita Lokhande, the actor, has portrayed it really well while also playing Archana. I am very impressed with her acting skills. And I would say that Ruhi Bagga has also done a fabulous job in portraying a grey character. 

I really do not dislike any particular character or actor. But the way the CVs develop the story and write the scenes to highlight a particular aspect of a character is what interests me. In the episode about the will, the sudden turn in Nina and Pari's tone on learning that Ankita would be the manager or Manav's business was striking and highlighted the self-centeredness the writers want to associate with these characters really well. That is all I meant.

Edited by muse10 - 9 years ago
Posted: 9 years ago
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? 
Posted: 9 years ago
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.

i said it was unfair for everyone, not just Pari. And it is unfair. Just bc legally it says so does not make it fair. As a child, especially someone who has worked for the company, you have expectations from your parents. That they treat you fairly and you recieve inheritance bc that is what usually happens upon the death of a parent. It is embedded in your thought process. Unless they have reasons to doubt you, there is that expectation. Sachin was the only one who had reason to believe he would be disinherited. But the others, why?
Edited by nikki1591 - 9 years ago
Posted: 9 years ago
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...

Related Topics

No Related topics found

Topic Info

17 Participants 24 Replies 4313Views

Topic started by xxxnm

Last replied by lovely_lady

loader
loader
up-open TOP