V Srinivasan
31 January 2014 at 17:08
Recently in our general body meeting the question of passing resolutions and communication with the Registrar was taken up.
The MC feel that communication with the The Registrar, MCGM and other statutory authorities is part of Secretary daily administrative work as per bye law 65 of the Hsg Society Act. But some members are of the opinion that Registrar, MCGM, are third parties and any communication has to be done with them after approval of general body which is supreme that the bye law and other laws. They also say that if the majority is of the view that some of the conditions of bye law need not be implemented if the General body decide so.
Please clarify
1. Whether general body can by pass the laws in force and pass a resolution since it has majority in contravention of the laws of the land.
2. Whether the MC has to go the General body for each and every communication to the Registrar/MCGM. MC is of the opinion that eEgistrar is monitoring the implementation of bye laws in Hsg Societies. and General body is the creation of bye law of hsg society and the bye laws are supreme.
Please give your opinion on the supremacy of the general body and laws of the land.
Srinivasan
V Srinivasan
31 January 2014 at 16:58
Dear Sir,
We have 85 members in our society. there are 28 stilt parking. These parking were allotted by the builder in 2006 .2007 and 2008 to some of the residents who had paid him some money. These allottment letters are not registered even though the contents of the letter says that it forms part of original sale agreement.
The question that in the bye law of the society nothing is mentioned about allotting parking to lessee and MC agrees to it. But stilt park owners say that the lessee is not eligible for parking and pass a resolution in contravention to bye law. Whether the resolution passed by a brute majority is valid in law.
The second question is that as per the Supreme court judgement of 2010 on stilt parking, the builder did not have the right to sell the stilt/open parking. When such is the case, whether the ii nd purchaser of a flat from the resident who hold a allottment letter issued by the builder who do not have a right to sell is eligible for the same.
Srinivasan
Member (Account Deleted)
31 January 2014 at 16:42
Dear Sir,
My mother is a retired Assistant Nursing Superitendent from Safdarjung Hospital,New Delhi and her parental home is Tohana,Dist.Fatehabad.Her parents have already expired and after their death,the ancestral property got transferred to her and her other 4 sisters and 1 brother as per Jamabandi Nakal (Fard).Her 2 sisters have given their share to their brother and other 2 sisters are undecided but my mother want her share because her brother & his family have always ill treated her and her mother to which her brother and other relatives from her parent side have objection since they are of belief that daughters have no share in parents property but as per law she is eligible.She has taken copy of Nakal from tohana tehsil and now want her share to be registered in her name after partition since her brother is not agreeing to give her share and since he and her relatives have good relations with tehsil people, they have told us that even if you go to tehsil for partition it will not happen and without partition you will not get anything.
We have hired one lawyer Mr.Chiman Lal Goel who sits in Tohana tehsil and knows our family very well and told him to get my job done but he is saying it is a very long procedure.We have given him latest Nakal copy & also map prepared by patwari but he is saying that notice has to be served to all the 85 people falling in the khewats & without their consent,partition can not happen & also you will get your share at 6 different places like 3 kanal in 1 khewat, 2 kanal in other khewat,etc which will be difficult for you to sell or give to somebody for cultivation.
As per Mr.Chiman Lal Goel, he had filed the application to Tehsildar,Tohana in Oct-2013 for partition but in December-13 he said your application has been rejected and now Tehsildar is saying to file 5 applications Khewat wise which he has filed in January-14.
Sir, we want your help in getting her share as we think that her brother & relatives are influencing the lawyer and also want clarification on below points-
1. Can I get my 3 acre share at one place all together as my brother & other 2 sisters are not cooperating means nobody comes for hearing in tehsil.
2. Also, when property has to be divided among we 4 family members then why consent of other people falling in the khewat has to be taken.
3. What is the time period within which tehsil has to do partition because my lawyer is saying it may take several years.
4. Can I take stay order on whole property as my brother may sell the property including my share by unlawful means.
5. Should I approach tehsil for partition or go to court and which court & is lawyer required in this case.
6. Can I directly go to court skipping tehsil.
Sir, we are writing this letter with lots of hope from you so that being a Senior Citizen Women, she should be saved from harassment and being a daughter, she should get her due share on time without any problem.
Thanks & Regards
Gurpreet Singh Bal
ganesh sabastian
31 January 2014 at 16:35
Sir,
my DOB registered in muncipal records is different from my other documents.while applying the passport, need to be submit DOB certificate.the difference is only two months while comapring my documents.
Please help me in this regard. what i have to do now to get the passport.
thanking you...
shivanand
31 January 2014 at 15:27
Subject : brif note on PTCL
Message :
Dear sir, We have purchased 7 acre of land which was granted to one of shivappa kallappa naikmakkal in the year 1966 with a condition of non-alienation of the land for a period of 15 years. The grantee alienated the land during the year 1982 and 1985.which is after completion of 15 year.we is the 3rd purchaser of the land. The grantee filed a case with assistant commissioner dharwad (Karnataka),during the year 2005 stating that he belongs to HINDU VALMIKI caste which has been classified as scheduled tribe community there by lending to violation of clause 4(2) of the PTCL act with contention of resumption of land back to original grantee. The assistant commissioner dharwad heard the case and rejected the petition standing that the caste of the grantee has been classified as scheduled tribe community W.E.F 19/04/1991.the grantee filed and appeal to deputy commissioner dharwad during the year 2006-07 .the D.C dharwd has heard the case and upheld the judgment of AC dharwad. The grantee again preferred an writ petition to the High court of Karnataka during 2009 the court had heard the case and again remanded back to the case to the DC dharwad for hearing and for passing appropriate order. Now the case has been called for hearing by the DC on 25/02/2014. In regards to the judgment issued by the high court single and double bench the following points have been brought to perusal the constitution scheduled tribe order 1950 has been issued as per the provision of article 342 of constitution classifying the community under ST and several amendments have been issued to the presidential notification 1950 by adding caste of person inserted to the ST list w.e.f 19/04/1991 Naik,Nayak,Beda,Bedar &valmiki (constitution 2nd amendment 1991 copy and bill passed by Lok saba copy enclosed ) As states above caste every Amendments to presidential notification of 1950. Thre is a specific Effective date, month & year on which the caste for to be considered as ST. In such circumstances the judgments have been issued by the Honble judges considering the caste added to the ST with Retrospective effect with revert back to the presidential notification 1950. Without considering the effect dates,month,&year of amendments by issue of judgments considering as Retrospective effect of 1950, injustice has been caused to the purchaser of the land there by resumption of purchaser land back to original grantee. In view of the above the necessary classification requires on the following points 1) Whether the constitution scheduled tribe all amendments & modification amendments are Retrospective or prospective? 2) On what bases the judgments have issued considering the constitution amendments to revert back to presidential notification 1950? 3) If the all amendments are Retrospective effect for this any of the notification issued in this regards? Dear sir kindly as soon as possible necessary legal advice on the above the doubts may please I communicated. We are waiting for kind advice Thanking you sir Shivanand m desai 9986980722
gopal
31 January 2014 at 15:03
Dear Sir,
I am going to file Revision petition in NCDRC.
I have seen NCDRC website, there they where given a list to file revision petition
1. Index
2. List of Dates
3. Memo of Parties (with fresh complete addresses)
4. Revision Petition with Notarised attested affidavit
5. Stay Application, or any other application if any, with Notarised attested affidavit
6. Application for condonation of delay with Notarised attested affidavit, if beyond limitation. (Within 90 days of the receipt of the order)
7. Certified copy of order of State Commission
8. Copy of order of District Forum
9. Copy of Complaint, Reply & Rejoinder filed before District Forum as well as copy of evidence if recorded and other documents relied on by both parties. (All the Annexures must be attested as True Copy on the last page with name & signature)
In the above list,
1 is Index and 2 is List of Dates
What is this index and What is the List of Dates
Kindly clarify
I would like to appear in person
Kindly guide
thanks and regards
ganesh sabastian
31 January 2014 at 12:15
Sir,
my DOB registered in muncipal records is different from my other documents.while applying the passport, need to be submit DOB certificate.the difference is only two months while comapring my documents.
Please help me in this regard. what i have to do now to get the passport.
thanking you...
MPK Mahendra Varma
31 January 2014 at 10:56
Me and my brother have been charged under 447,427 of IPC and sec 3 of TNPPDL for our land dispute . I need related case laws for these section and how to squash the case please guide me im law student doing my 2nd yr call 09171000070
sk..........
31 January 2014 at 09:20
In civil suit for injunction application has to be made for appointment of commissioner,what should be the points in application and what is the fees to be paid.
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Parking as per approved plan.
Dear Sir,
There is a peculiar situation. Our society has 26 parking as per approved ground floor plan. But the builder has converted into 29 stilt parking. He has allotted the same by way of letter of allotment after receiving money and given numbers of the stilt parking in the allotment letter. But when the MC verified the same it was found that some of the numbers did not tally with the number held in the approved plan. It was informed by the holders that they are parking in the place as identified by the builder for last six years. but there are objections to the same from some members saying that they should park in the number as per plan.
Please clarify which is correct in view of the Supreme Court judgement of 2010 which has held that builder cannot sell stilt/open parking.
Srinivasan