Thursday, December 25, 2014

RESOURCES COrner - for THINKERS only -


Harried PSB staff and frayed tempers to the fore »      1 comment


Banks are ripping off Consumers in many ways. Will PM Modi & Arun Jaitley question them?

<Dr Chakrabarty, well known for his brutal outspokenness, had said, “I don’t agree with the institutional view of the RBI… on allowing banks to charge for withdrawals from their own banks.” He demolished the claim that customers must pay for services saying, “If banks want to move to a system of transaction fees to be paid by customers, then they must also be prepared to work at very low interest spread. They cannot pay 4% on savings accounts but charge 12% or more on advances and also charge customers for transactions.”
Contrary to RBI’s belief that service quality drives the customer’s choice of banks, most often people are tied to a bank because of salary accounts, scarce lockers, electronic payments for utility bills, credit cards or loans. It is not easy to cut these strings frequently.>
"....will meet bankers in Pune at a two-day banker’s 'retreat' - with or even without looking up a dictionary, the word, it may be realized, has an ominous foreboding, - repulsive to / flying in the face of / the very objective of the intended meet.

As regards customers' grievances, topping them all but found no specific mention is, the bank's ongoing practice for long but not cared to be looked into and remedied thus far. That is, concerning the unscrupulous charge by way of reckoning afresh, and reducing interest otherwise already accrued due, on withdrawals of own monies in deposit, if done before the stipulated period; and adding insult to the injury, further reduce additionally '1%' of the deposit, The most objectionable part of it  is that banks do so, even with no clear cut term / condition stipulated by bank or made known to the depositor at the time of placing the deposit. To be precise, in one such instance, the term/condition as stipulated / disclosed on the face of the  account opening form of the bank is so clumsy, and the language distorted to such an extent that it can have no lawful binding.

For sampling, -

"Subject to such terms and conditions as the bank may stipulate ..make  premature payment of the proceeds ... be at liberty though not bound and its absolute discretion , to repay the deposit before maturity , ..." UQ

For the view taken by the RBI Ombudsman himself , that too in a case of foreclosure of home loan, refer, - Bank pulled up for 'deficient documentation' | Business Line

Should that be so, is there not adequate justification / all the more reason why the same logic ought to be applied and followed, when withdrawal is out of , unlike in respect of borrowing by customer, his own monies lying in deposit? Are not the banks, in still, to the contrary, pursuing its own dubious way of thinking / in-house / in-box philosophy, taking advantage of the largely prevailing unawareness/ callous attitude on the part of customers,  liable to consequences flowing from the patently wrong practice, in breach of faith and trust ignorantly placed by customers? 

Now that the ball is in RBI's court, it is for the regulator to take a conscious note of the widely obtaining discontent of the customers and bring succor, with no longer wait.  


DEC 30

 By overstaying, a licensee cannot claim tenancy rights

Personal View (to incite more thoughts):

The concept of "Leave and Licence" is, in comparison to the rest such as "licence", "Tenancy" , of a recent origin. And that is is not a legal concept, and is one of convenience, brought in vogue, for more than one physiological reason / as a ploy; mainly to get out of the rigors of the law on 'tenancy', and its offshoot- rent control law, though outdated but allowed to remain on the rules book.

Divorced from/rid of its legal clothing, in the ultimate analysis, none is different from the others. Whatever that be, if strictly and righteously viewed, the lawful owner or holder's rights and interests which ought to be safeguarded and protected by the law even in the normal course. If it be a flat, then, in the nature of things, as it is the housing society in which the property as a whole is vested, one could validly urge, once complained against, the MC itself may be regarded to have the power and authoritatively help its owner/member in having an occupant evicted. For, anyone overstaying or staying for any period beyond the agreed period, and more so, without the consent or against the will of the owner-member has to be treated simply as a 'tress- passer', hence an offender.

The court verdict, though happens  to have come late, is a welcome development; and the judicial view should serve the purpose of further  dilating it on the indicated lines.

Cross Refer >


Suresh Mohanlal Goradia vs Hiralal G. Thakkar And Ors. on ...

Bombay High Court ... that the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 does not prescribe any time limit ... the provisions can be prosecuted in the cases of continuing offences. 3. On these rival submissions and on the nature of offences committed by the .... Mr. Vashi further relied on the decision reported in Baijoo Mandal v.

DEc 26

Paying Taxes Voluntarily – What you must Know


Basic Concepts and Features of Good and Service ... - ijsrm

Read Together With

Entry Tax as an Alternative to Octroi - National Institute of ...



Pre-Budget talks: hike infra spend & redress GST concerns, States tell Centre

Preparing the ground Finance Minister Arun Jaitley along with Finance Secretary Rajiv Mehrishi at the pre-Budget meeting with the State Finance Ministers in the capital on Friday. RAMESH SHARMA

Our Bureau

Tamil Nadu opposes Constitution Amendment Bill; asks Centre not to hurry »


Real Estate Regulation Bill in the offing: Venkaiah Naidu (2)

Ch R S Sarma

The NDA Government is planning to introduce a comprehensive Real Estate Regulation Bill to prote... »      1 comment

Now open, a single window to view various bank accounts

K Ram Kumar

2 private banks offer facility; to transact customers must go to each bank site »

Credai calls for reforms to promote realty growth (1)

1.  Sheer political will might serve no purpose. much less bring about even remotely any real real estate reform(s) as misconceived and canvassed.. It is high time that CREDAI minds to realize that the master key lies with itself and its errant constituents ; lest, any continuing misdemeanors or misadventures on the part of either or both , in short obtaining irregularities impacting and impairing gravely the larger interests of the investing public , disgruntled at that, can only be expected to spell an inevitable disaster to selves.

2. A random survey is bound to bring to the fore and pointedly reveal that, more often than not, the gullible buyers' community is unduly influenced to prefer / choose a promoter- entity based on the mere fact projected in Ads., with the implicit concurrence of, that it is a member of, CREDAI. But told or untold miseries / hardships that many such buyers, if not all, are put to face may be readily gathered from open complaints in public domain. As such, is not, in all fairness, - just as the representative body takes upon itself the task of and caring to vociferously air the expectations of the sector from the government, - duty bound to first set things right at home. And do so, by all sincere and effective measures, open to it for disciplining its constituents, thereby secure, in public interest,an ethical and upright conduct on their part. In short, with or without an external regulator, what is essentially wanting, as urged by the UDM,  is ‘self -regulation’.

RELATED here >

Formation of Apartment Owners Association in Bangalore ...

I have in my previous Posts on this website (Link: set out my views on the subject law in force in Karnataka.
The points made have specific reference to what the law provides with regard to the two essential formalities requiring compliance by any Builder of Apartment Buildings in the State of Karnataka in general, in Bangalore in particular.

Recently, my attention has been drawn to CREDAI- Karnataka’s Code of Ethics & Conduct and pointed out that certain mandate to the Members as laid down in the Code, in terms, seemingly contradicts the correct position under the law.
In paragraph 5 therein, the relevant portion reproduced below, reads:
A Member:
5.1) Shall form the Association of Owners and get the Deed of declaration registered within a reasonable period from the date of completion of construction or from the date of last registration of UDI/Unit and …. ”

The above mandatory rule is not reconcilable at all with what the law clearly provides.
As may be readily seen, even on a plain but straightforward reading and understanding of the relevant sections of the Apartment Act and the Rules there under, the correct position is more than abundantly clear, which is as under:

Execution and Registration of the Deed of Declaration in Form ‘A’ under the Indian Registration Act is the first stage for compliance. Importantly, that has to necessarily precede the second crucial stage namely, – the Execution of the Deed of Conveyance by the Builder, of any one or more of the Units (Apartments) in a building with construction completed.

Thereafter should follow, – the Formation and Registration of the ‘Owners’ Association’ under the Act (read with /under the Co-operative Societies Act).
The mandate under reference above is, to put it rather mildly, and in an inoffensive manner of speaking, tantamount to a reversal of the normal logical order i.e.- PUT THE HORSE BEFORE THE CART.

According to my information, however, the procedure followed as a matter of practice among the Member Builders is not uniform but is varied. So much so, there is an unadulterated chaos and confusion in the matter of compliance with the law, adversely impacting the valuable rights and interests of the purchasing community as conferred by the law. 

I am confident that, with a view to doing full justice to its own laudable objectives, more so for saving the purchasers from the currently obtaining disastrous consequences recklessly meted out to them, CREDAI should come out with a suitable modification and clarification of the Code for the Builders to follow at least from now on.

I need not add that, the matter is of such a serious nature that it in all fairness deserves top priority for effective steps being taken on a war footing by CREDAI. This calls for a forceful representation to CREDAI from affected Purchasers of Apartments after obtaining a legal opinion from an expert practicing in this field.

No doubt, the above is one of the several aspects, which hopefully should be duly taken care of in the new regulatory central law in the offing. Nonetheless,even under the existing law the correct position is seemingly clear. It is therefore obligatory on the part of CREDAI to volunteer and come forward with the necessary modification and / or clarification of the existing mandate in its Code; if it considers necessary, after taking legal opinion from its own Advisers.



Who / Where to  really find the 'culprit' ?!

The analogy can be described like this:

  • Philosophy is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat.
  • Metaphysics is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that isn't there.
  • Theology is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that isn't there, and shouting "I found it!"
  • Science is like being in a dark room and looking for a switch. The light will reveal a cat... if there is one.

It can also be applied to other bodies of knowledge or learning, e.g. by Ernest Gellner to Marxism.[1]


1. YOU be the JUDGE > Has not CREDAI lost its credibility/right to be heard long since ?! 

2. Should it not be made a necessary party, by invoking tortuous liability, in all disputes of BUYERS against  PROMOTERs, if  be a registered member of the BODY ??!!

Accommodation Times to organise conference on Development Agreement tomorrow


Dec 27th, 2014

Faridabad Stand Still on all residential projects

Bangalore roads affecting real estate prices

Competition Commission of India: A new Watch Dog for Real Estate

BS News

Ajay Singh: Forty companies, a dispute and some defaults 

<> The narrated episode makes for ,-to rhyme with 'tale of two cities' or 'one man company' a novel idea given a legal shape under the new company law –'tell tales' of one man with many ('RELATED', a modern day concept that has increasingly come to be regarded as the proverbial red rag to a BULL (-as personified by the whole lot of so called regulators , or semi- or self-regulators, styled/named  SEBI, ICSI,  CLB, RBI,  ICAI >>>) companies; and, with many fanciful names – ANY THOUGHTS to toe the line , especially from the expected-to-be-concerned government / its authoritative quarters AND/OR company law experts at large?

A Tale of Two Cities (1859) is a novel by Charles Dickens, set in London and Paris before and during the French Revolution.
The novel depicts the plight of the French peasantry demoralised by the French aristocracy in the years leading up to the revolution, the corresponding brutality demonstrated by the revolutionaries toward the former aristocrats in the early years of the revolution, and many unflattering social parallels with life in London during the same period. It follows the lives of several characters through these events.
< courtesy

No comments:

Post a Comment