Update:
UNRELATED or RELATABLES ?!
1.
|
6 hours ago... of Justice's Environmental Crimes unit said Walmart has been slapped with $110 million in pollution fines — the second largest criminal environmental fee ... The Arkansas-based company will have to pay $81.6 million to ...
|
2.
What in the World
In a world that is increasingly complex, we need to seek greater awareness of the blending of cultures and America's changing role in a global community.
3. Michael Winship: Good Consumers, Bad Citizens
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/05/30
Cross-refer >
http://praja.in/en/blog/m...
< ALSO PREVIOUS BLOGs>
<previous
http://vswaminathan-swamilook.blogspot.in/2013/05/icl-modern-day-necessities-to-read-into.html
AT NEWS (not unrelated)>
29 May 2013
FSI norm for high-rise in Andhra Pradesh
Time to upgrade home loan terms
&
RTI not applicable to Co-operative Housing Societies*
Excerpts>
< Nation wide protest for not to include Co-operative Societies is gearing momentum.
Where the societies are not in favour of RTI since they feel that members can have information under respective state Acts and if RTI applicable, hOnorary posts will not be occupied and there will BE severe crisis as to management of the societies.>
<
"they feel..."-
> An unwarranted controveresy, a miscnceived fear -based- apprehension; albeit either option potent with far-reaching rections/lopsided views likely to surface.
>> Other recent deveopments like, -doing away with requirement of 'fidelity bonds' for office bearers (MC?), other seemingly- innocuous -but -not -so norms, newly introduced through the 97 th Amendment of the Indian Constitution could only be expcted to lead to further muddling-up the already muddled /swaeepingly messed-up scenario in the realm of management of the affairs of housing complexes (be it comprising apartments or flats).
<> Though the real but hidden tragedy, entailing over-reaching vulnerable or vital facets, are seemingly overlooked. For, the fact of life / reality, though remaining shadowed, is that the State Acts spoken of are mostly on paper, but not sincerely enforced or followed both by the government and its authorities, equally so by the supposedly vested interests, being the purchasers of apartments or flats, as the case may be..
<><> But the real tragedy / over-reaching vulnerable or vital facet, seemingly overlooked, lies in the fact that the State Acts spoken of are mostly on paper, but not sincerely implemented or enforced by the government and its empowered authorities, or not followed as expected of the supposedly vested interests, being the purchasers of apartments or flats, as the case may be. To be more exact, rather honest, the default /systemic failure is to be owned by those who have, driven by some extraneous reasons, or ulterior motive, or quiuxotic mindset of their own, volunteer to be part of the MC, without even knowing what are expected of them by the law or byelaws.
Add-on>
http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/maharashtra-co-op-societies-act-amended-102041201055_1.html
>XTRACT
Residents of co-operative housing societies, who normally are reluctant to take up the honorary responsibility of looking after the affairs of the society, are expected not to join managing committees.
According to the new rules, every elected member of the managing committee of a society shall execute a bond on a stamp paper, as provided under the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958, within 15 days of his assuming office. The chief executive officer/secretary of the society shall receive such bonds and keep them in the records of the society and accordingly inform the Registrar of Societies within 15 days from the formation of the committee. Further, under the rules, a provisional list of voters should be prepared by every notified society in the year in which the election of the society is due to be held. Persons who have completed a minimum two years as members from the date of their enrolment should be included in the provisional list.
Related (RTI) Story >
RTI & Income Tax Act, vis-à-vis a case law decided by SC
Xcerpts>
<
A. Relevant provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005
1) Preamble
The preamble to the RTI Act describes the intent of the Legislature to enact the RTI Act. The opening para of the preamble states as follows:“An act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities,
in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority͙”
2) Definition as contained in Section 2 of the Act
a. Sub-section (f) defines ‘information’ as: “means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, log books, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force”.
b. Sub-section (j) defines ‘right to information’ as
i. “the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes the right to-
ii. inspection of work, documents, records;
iii. taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records;
iv. taking certified samples of material;
v. obtaining information in the thrm of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device;
c. Sub-section (n) defines ‘third party’ as “a person other than the citizen making a request for information and includes public authority”
ICl
Agreements to Agree
<> Sporadic Reaction (jottings):
This instantly brings to one's mind a (contract) agreement, dubbed so but incomplete, in many respects. Such type can be said to be very commonly-come-across these days. Reference is those virtually one-sided agreements. In that, the terms and conditions, as drafted and incorporated, are heavily leaning to the side of the principal party being the, first named. For a glaring but often noted instance in real life, focus may be made to an “agreement to sell" executed by by a promoter in respect of sale of an 'apartment' (i.e. unit of a building – seen mushrooming in every place - village or town or city). No doubt, there are certain crucial clauses of stipulation e.g. known as ”‘Indemnity Clause” which are necessarily required to be included. For, without those clauses, any agreement of the referred type, even on the first blush, might have to be compulsively inferred to have been deliberately drafted , in a shamefully crafty manner, only with a view to defeating the purposes/interests of the second party. The most painfully irritating part of it all is the fact that , if and when confronted, the first named party invariably tries and seeks shelter by saying that the document has been drafted by his project consultant and /or law adviser, rolled into one,
Indisputably, no first named principal party, much less his professional law adviser, if qualified or duly equipped, can rightfully and lawfully claim, or defend self by making an averment to the effect that, any such agreement has to be considered as a ‘contract agreement’, within the framework of the law, That is, as one truly effective and purposeful, in law; More so, if due regard be had to, and is kept in full view, the governing law (INCLUDING ALL RELATED STATUTORYRULES AND REGULATIONS as are in force); such as the special enactment governing apartments, in force , in most of the states, If were to be accepted, is, for obvious reasons, bound to have the disastrous result of defeating the rights and interests vested by law in the other party ,being the second named; in the referred case, purchaser of the apartment.
Concept of "common areas" - Is not the prevailing confusion ..
The expert’s answers to two of the readers’ queries should be of common concern to every apartment owner and /or a non-owner resident :
1. Rohini's query
2. 'A Reader's' query -(immediately following one)
These pertain to areas, more often than not, giving rise to disagreement, problems, altercations, also to disputes leading to litigation, among the owners and other residents in an apartment complex. Hence, in one’s strong view, any solution inuring for the 'common' good has to be necessarily found not outside of but within the frame work of - that is, by keeping in full focus and in the light of, -the governing law.
Own observations (in brief, in that order):
1. It is honestly believed that, - rather it may be the conviction of anyone having a clear and close understanding of the law, particularly of the concept of 'common areas' as embodied therein, - any bye-law licensing anyone of the owners or residents in an apartment building to make personal use (as opposed to common use) of any such area as the exteriors of the building , -which , as per the law, is part and parcel of the common areas, hence required to be 'maintained' by the joint body (association) of co-owners- should be considered to have no leg to stand on; if so, would be non-est, rather a non- starter, any such license , if given, being prima facie repugnant to the law.
2. The given apartment(s), not having been made clear by the querist, may require to be presumed (which the expert also seems to imply in his answer) to be one of those very rarely come-across buildings in Bangalore. Reference is to the ones which have strictly followed the special law on apartments. That is, -not only the Act but also all related rules and regulations, of a material nature; further, both by the promoter-entity and its purchasers.
If so done, one can see no sound reason or logic why or how "non-members" (i.e. other than the apartments' owners) can rightly claim to be not bound by, - or will have a valid defence to refuse to abide by, a decision of the owners, taken unanimously, or by a majority.
In any view, at least in principle that must be so; without going into the merits or otherwise of the kind of 'charge' in question and decided upon. It is, in this context, that compliance with the legal requirement of Form B assumes significance and importance.
Contrary to the impression given in certain quarters, such of the provisions of law in force as relate to “common areas” cannot be considered to suffer from any lacuna; much less of a material nature, as to enable anyone to use it as a valid defence for encroaching upon , by making personal use, of any part of the “common areas” within the meaning of the law.
KEY Note : Earlier Post herein, excusively on the topic of "common areas", may be found to provide the necessary backdrop.