sagar Rao
05 January 2011 at 15:03
Dear Sir/Madem
My father had won 400 square yards land and myself and my elder brother built the house by investing an amount of Rs.9 lakhs in which i contribute Rs.6 lakhs and my elder brother is Rs.3 lakhs and we are four brothers and my fouth brother had build bouble bed room portion on first floor by investing 2.5 lakhs and he had died 19 months back and my father expired last 6 years back and my mother/bothers want division of house in three equal parts of 133.33 Sq to each of them,my third brother had not invested any money on property.
As there is no proof of money invested on house, in written document or accounts had been not maintained, only Father/mother and relatives/society people knows.
We brothers are not co operative and having different attitude in sharing of property and my mother had approached our community elders to divide the property by calculating amount invested by their sons on property in the month of June 2010.
Our community elders are given 138.5 squar yards + first floor of two bedroom portion to my elder brother, me 138.5 square yards and my younger brother had given 123 square yards + he had to give Rs.35000/- to me for which they have given one month time to my brother,
We all brothers had to give Rs.2000/- per month to my mother for her expenses and we should provide one room to her if she come and stay with is sons.
All above sharing of property details was written on community letter head we and our community (Society)president & secratery have signed on letterhead.
But now after 6 months are over my two brothers had not given her Rs.2000/-to my mother and my younger brother is refusing to pay Rs.35000/- to me stating that he don’t have money with him, and I and my mother had informed same to my community elders and they also stating to forgive my brothers as they dont have any money, but fact is that their are having the money but dont want to give it me or my mother.
My mother stay with me from last 15 years and from day of division of our house i was little bite angry with my mother,from last two months onwards my mother is staying with my younger brother and my younger brother and his wife had show worldly pressures to my mother by not providing proper food and accommodation in their house, spoken unhealthy langue and my mother is very angry with the way their are treated and now my mother wants to divide the house in four parts so that she can stay in one part of the house along with me and my family, as my elder brother also not behave good with my mother and my mother not at all likes to stay with him.
My mother informed to society members and to all his sons but my two brothers are not accepting and society people are not showing or responding properly.
So i request you all to inform me the legal procedure to get our house divide in four parts so that me and my mother stay in 2 parts together (i,e 200 square yard land ) as my two brothers are not willing to sign on papers and threating to kill my mother if house is dived in four parts and their took away documents of our house(tittle deed) which was with my mother and please inform how to get the document back as they may sell or mortgage house without our consent.
mathi vadhana
05 January 2011 at 11:22
u have said that cancellation of settlement deed can be done thru court of law under spl circumstances,wat are they?if so,if a condition put forth in the settlement,like retaining a portion is breached, can u cancel the deed under civil court of law declaring it to be null n void since breached?can this condition putforth be treated as a reversionary clause?under what sec can u file?
Maheshkumar Sharma
03 January 2011 at 12:17
sir, we are using sand for the construction work business. pl. let me know the rates of royalty in mh.states for the use of sand,dust etc.
whether it is development royalty ?
DILIP SHAH
31 December 2010 at 13:40
REDEVELOPMENT OF OLD HOUSING SOCIETIES IN MUMBAI: BOND UNDER THE MAHARASHTRA CO-OP SOCIETIES ACT: CONTRIBUTED BY DILIP SHAH
I take this opportunity to write something on Bond required to be executed by the members of the Managing Committee of the Co-operative Housing Societies within 15 days of their assuming the office under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960.
The provision is important because if the bond is not executed within 15 days of his assuming the office or if the member fails to execute the bond he shall be deemed to have vacated his office as a member of the Managing Committee.
Attention is also invited to the Bye-law no 136 of the old Model bye-laws and bye-law no 138 of the new Model bye-laws which lay down as under:
"The members of the Committee shall be jointly and severally liable for making good any loss which the society may suffer on account of their negligence or omission to perform any of the duties and functions cast on them under the Act, Rules and Bye-laws of the Society."
In addition to the above bye-laws, an amendment was inserted by Mah. 41 of 2000, S. 3 of the amending Act (w.e.f. 23-8-2000) to Section 73 by introducing Section (1AB) to the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960. Similarly Rule 58-A was inserted by G.N. of 18-2-2002 in the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 and Form M-20 was also inserted by G.N. of 18-2-2002.
Section 73(1AB) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960 is reproduced below:
"The Members of the Committee shall be jointly and severally responsible for all the decisions taken by the committee during its term relating to the business of the society. The members of the committee shall be jointly and severally responsible for all the acts and omissions detrimental to the interest of the society. Every such member shall execute a bond to that effect within fifteen days of his assuming the office, in the form as specified by the State Government by general or special order.
The member, who fails to execute such bond within the specified period i.e. within fifteen days from joining the Managing Committee member, shall be deemed to have vacated his office as a member of the committee."
Further, the power to decide whether the losses incurred by the society are due to act or omissions of members of the committee is given to the Registrar
"Provided that, before fixing any responsibility mentioned above, the Registrar shall inspect the records of the society and decide as to whether the losses incurred by the society are on account of acts or omissions on the part of the members of the committee or on account of any natural calamities, accident or any circumstances beyond the control of such members."
Rule 58-A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules 1961 is reproduced below:
"Every elected member of the Managing Committee shall execute a bond in Form M-20 within fifteen days of his assuming the office. Such bond shall be executed on the stamp paper as provided under the Bombay Stamp Act 1958. The expenditure on stamp paper shall be borne by the society. The Chief Executive Officer / secretary of the society shall receive such bonds and keep them on record of the society and accordingly inform the Registrar within Fifteen days from the formation of the Committee."
It is clear from above that the bond must be executed within fifteen days of assuming of office by each member of the Managing Committee in Form M-20 on a stamp paper. Failure will invite penal consequences.
INDIA: MANAGING COMMITTEE OF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY MUST EXECUTE BOND
March 2008
Article by Dilip Shah
The legislature having experienced and realized that the members of the Managing Committee of different co-operative societies were acting in an arbitrary manner, with a view to have some accountability amongst the members of the Managing Committee, have enacted a provision in the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 ("MCSA") mandating every member of such Managing Committee to execute a bond within 15 days from the date being elected as Committee member. If the committee member fails to execute the bond within the specified period, then such member shall be deemed to have vacated his office as member of the Committee. This provision has been given effect by Section 73(1AB) of the MCSA.
This legislation was recently challenged by a Writ Petition filed in the Bombay High Court (Writ Petition No. 457 of 2007) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground that the same is ultra virus. However, the Bombay High Court has upheld the legislature’s act.
The intention of the legislature is to make the members fully aware of their personal responsibility and liability towards the society and its members. The time limit laid down under Section 73(1AB) is mandatory and the elected committee members have to hand over the bond to the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Society within such stipulated time.
This ruling of the Bombay High Court in the aforesaid writ petition emphasizes the basic principle of "ignorance of law is not an excuse" i.e. being unaware of the provision contained in Section 73(1AB) of the MCSA cannot be used an excuse for the failure to execute the bond within the stipulated time.
Bandra building residents unearth Rs 100 crore fraud
A resident of Rachna co-operative housing society at Hill Road in Bandra has accused some members of the managing committee of resorting to forgery to strike a Rs 100 crore deal for redevelopment rights.
Mohammed Musaddique Shaikh, the resident, alleges the members resorted to forgery fearing the deal would fall through as the papers of the society were not in order.
“After the managing committee members entered into an agreement with the builder for redevelopment in December 2006, they realized that they had not filed the mandatory indemnity bonds,” alleges Shaikh.
When a managing committee is elected, it is mandatory for them to file indemnity bonds (before the registrar of societies) accepting responsibility for wrong-doing, if any, during their tenure. Without the indemnity bonds, the society cannot enter into a deal to redevelop the property.
“The election took place on May 25, 2004. The committee was constituted on the same day. The indemnity bonds ought to have been placed on record by committee members on or before June 9, 2004, which was not done,” alleges Shaikh.
His advocate Pradeep Havnur says, “Members not having filed indemnity bonds within 15 days of being elected cease to be part of the managing committee. All documents signed when they have ceased to be managing committee members are illegal and cannot be given effect to proceed in any matter pertaining to the society’s day to day affairs.”
“When residents of the society insisted on seeing copies of the indemnity bonds, the accused purchased stamp papers and prepared back-dated indemnity bonds,” alleges Shaikh. Another resident, S B Naik, moved the HC alleging fraud.
The court asked the additional controller of stamps (Mumbai) to investigate. The investigation revealed that the dates on the indemnity bonds were forged. An officer at Bandra police station said a complaint was registered under Sections 465, 467 and 471 of the IPC.
HIGH COURT ORDERS FRESH ELECTIONS TO MANAGING COMMITTEE OF INDUSTRIAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETY
Dilip Shah
Posted: Dec 25, 2007 - Article Directory, India
Mumbai, December 25 The Bombay High Court recently ordered fresh elections to the managing committee of an industrial cooperative society in Chunabhatti.
Following their removal from the committee for non-execution of bonds under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, Deepak Rao and others had moved the HC contesting the order passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar as he was “facing corruption charges and his anticipatory bail application was rejected by the sessions court”.
The Managing Committee of the Shri Mahalakshmi Industrial Premises Cooperative Society Ltd was superseded by an order of the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies on July 6. The members challenged the order before the Divisional Joint Registrar Shivaji Pahinkar — who is under suspension, according to Assistant Government Pleader G W Mattos. Pahinkar dismissed their appeal on October 23, following which the members moved the HC.
According to Mattos, the petitioners contested Pahinkar’s order as he had passed it on October 23, a day after his anticipatory bail application was rejected by the session’s court. The petitioners expressed apprehension that the order was “based on consideration other than merit”, according to Mattos.
According to Mattos, Justice A M Khanwilkar observed that if the petitioners' contention was accepted, the court would have to order an inquiry into the allegations and, if found true, the matter will have to be referred back to the appellate authority for fresh hearing.
Mattos contended before Justice Khanwilkar that the managing committee was removed on technical grounds as they ceased to be members for non-execution of bonds. Mattos submitted that instead of going into allegations and counter-allegations, it would be appropriate to hold fresh elections to the committee.
According to Mattos, observing that the removal was technically correct, the court directed that the three members of the seven who had executed the bonds should continue to function as the Board of Administrators (BoA) instead of the single administrator appointed by the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies on July 6.
Mattos said the HC then directed the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies to issue order in this regard by December 27. The court also directed that elections to the committee should be held within three months. The court has, however, asked the BoA not to take any major policy decisions during this period.
Dilip Shah
Counselor and Analyst for Redevelopment of Housing Societies
9819825752
32411533
dilip7shah@gmail.com
Vijay Sharma
30 December 2010 at 11:30
Sir,
By probated will a property has been bequesthed to HUF of his son and his son is appointed as executor of the will. Now to transfer the property in the name of HUF a Deed of Transfer was made. My question is to transfer the property in the name of HUF in collector office and BMC does the Deed of Transfer needs to be registered before submitting the same to Collector;s office and the BMC.
Gaurav Sengupta
29 December 2010 at 12:24
HI,
I had applied for an apartment in TDI- Kundli Kingsburry
in 2005
They are yet to begin construction of the block in which
I have the apartment.
They have asked me to pay revised EDC of some 3.5 lacs
Q: Is it mandatory for me to pay even if they havent even started on the block?
And they are asking for 18% interest penalty for non patment
kindly help
Warm Regards
John Noronha
24 December 2010 at 20:44
Dear Sir,
Kindly help me with my query which pertains to cancellation of a Name in Form 'D' (Property Card). Im from Goa and would like you to answer my query with relevance to my State, if any.
My maternal uncle (unmarried) had an understanding with his nephew, Dr. Pinto that he will be looked after by the said Dr. in his old age. This took place somewhere in the 60's when my uncle was around 44 yrs. Keeping the understanding in mind, the name of the Dr. was included in the property card (Form 'D') as co-owner (half share). The said Dr. left for Brazil to practice there and was in touch with my uncle initially.
Gradually he stopped the communication and till date we have not heard from him. We dont have his present contact details as none of the family has heard from him. Some have even presumed he has passed away.
My uncle has gifted his part of the property to me through Gift Deed which is registered in the Sub-Reg office, since we are looking after him in his old age (presently 94 yrs). When I applied for mutation I was told tht I should apply for a Court order to delete the name of the Dr. in the Form 'D'.
My query is to know the process for the said deletion of name in the property card and any other relevant information.
I would much appreciate your help in this regard. Thanking you in anticipation,
Yours truly,
John Noronha.
Ajit
17 December 2010 at 15:59
Can anyone provide me the copy of notification that discloses current rate of land (agricultural or non-agricultural) for registration purposes in Haryana.
ashish vasant joshi
07 December 2010 at 11:55
dear sir,
my uncle, with no wife & kids,made nomination of his flat vide nomination form 14 in triplicate as per CHS ACT, to society to nominate my son as flat owner in the event of his death. my son being a minor, in the WILL my uncle left,appointed me,the father,to own the said flat till my son attains MAJOR&thereafter the son becomes the lawful owner, even after 4 yrsof uncle's death and all papers furnished, the society did not transfer the title entry in my sons name, and the secretary of CHS has had a grudge in this case. sir, pl. guide me the best alternative to solve the problem. ashish joshi.nashik
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Agriculture Land
Respacted Sir/ Madam
My Father have an Agriculture Land Alloted jointly in name of My father and his two broters out of Five Brothers from my Grand Father. at That time they were living as joint family with My Grandh Father and his Brother.
The Said agriculture land was alloted amonth my father and his two brothers, Ladn was situated in Two arraji in different Location in Rajasthan. A disput arrived when one of the file for Suitable "Bantwara" and We won the case. Beside of these one of my second grandfather's son who was only one child from him was taken in to his ownership since 40 years without any written agreement and he doing agriculture activity their.
The Bantwara among my father and his two brother taken place as per Revenue court Order at both place in 2008 and the give us. one of my uncle has taken kabja on behalf of the court order at both place.
The question arrise that Grandfather's Brother son file a suit in court for transferr the property in name of him on behalf of Joint Family and his Kabja since 40 yrs from my father and his two brothers name. on behalf of Oral acceptance by my father and his brothers. The Court has summed to Parti Name araji Opened and asked to present their owenership.
The case should be accepted by the Oral acceptance and his Kabja since 40 years and one of Quarrl Case amongh the party filed in a Police Station againt him ( The Cusine uncle ) and my father ?
The Question is arrived that could the Court intertain the case on behalf of the above to transfer in Cusine Uncle beside that the property was allotted in name of my father and his two botther and we fought suit between them and won and taken kabja in paper of Govt. TAhsildar orders on behalf of Revenue Court Order or reject the case ?
and one thing I would like to mention whole property partition case was in knowldege of Cusine Uncle and his father ?
please guide