Muncipal corporation
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 05 September 2011
This query is : Resolved
When the corporation has rejected the regularizastion application as according to the corporation it was made in the common property of the apartment and the sale deed also shows that the area does not belong to me and issued notice for demolition what are the options before me to save the property which i have made.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 05 September 2011
i have not applied for permission as it was only an extension of our duplex house, we closed the open balcony as the vasthu experts asked us to close the east and west open balconies.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 05 September 2011
if its an unauthorised alterations and extensions made by you , it has to be demolished . at most you can file suit and try to obtain an injunction restraining muncipal coprpration from demolishing it . if court grants an injunction corporation wont be able to demloish it till injunction is vacated
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 05 September 2011
Expert : ajay sethi advised the only way provided court issues injunction which shall not be issued without affording hearing given to corporation.A notice prior to suit may also be necessary.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 05 September 2011
i have already taken an interim stay from junior civil judge which was vacated then i filed c.m.a with the addl. Chief judge and obtained a status quo which was latter dismissed.
Now i filed a c.r.p in the high court and obtained an interim stay. If this also gets vacated what course of action are available to me.
Kiran Kumar
(Expert) 05 September 2011
then certainly your will have to approach SC, where you will be having rare chances...
it seems that you are not stating the clear facts of the matter.
post the orders passed by the courts below for detailed analysis.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 05 September 2011
In fact law is so that you can only delay in courts but finally unless corporation itself agrees to compound on penalty but since construction is on others land that too seems next to impossible.
SAANJAAY GUPTAA
(Expert) 06 September 2011
Always ask your questions revealing the all facts and order otherwise it will be difficult to answer the query.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 06 September 2011
We wanted to close the open balcony of our pent house and asked the other flat owners to allow us to do so, as the area which we ae planning to clsoe is not covered under our sale deed.As some flat owners were against the construction they reported to the corporation which issued a notice to us stating us that we have been converting the open balcony into habitual room by constructing the wall violating the provisions of the corporation rules and asking us to reply to them within 10 days failing which the corporation could pull down the said construction.
We replied to the corporation that we are under the impression that constructing a small wall does not need the approval of the corporation and that we are clsoing the open balconies only under the advice of vasthu experts who asked us to close the east and west side of the open balconies. Latter we applied for regularisastion.
Some flat owners approached the high court and obtained a stay of construction. We also approached the high court against the high handed approach oft the corporation.
The flat owners who have taken a stay also filed a contempt case.
The corporation rejected our proposal for regularisation and we approached the junior civil judge who has given an interim stay, which was latter dismissed as the judge observed that we have hidden the material fact that the matter was in the high court.
When the contempt case came up for hearing we denied that we did not go agaisnst the orders of the court but the corporation in their counter affadavit stated that as the regularisation has been rejected and as we have constructed the closing of the open balconies even after them issuing a notice, the said unauthorised construction would be demolished immedieatley.
We, then approached the addl. chief judge in a c.m.a and obtained a status quo against the dismissal of the interim stay in the juniour civil judges court,
The c.m.a was dissmissed by the addl.chief judge observing that the juniour civil judge has rightly gone thru the case and that we have hidden the matterial facts intentionally and also that we have continued construction even after that notice issued by the construction and then applied for regularisastion and that we have come with unclean hands and approached this court.
We, now in a c.r.p in the hgh court challenged the orders of the civil courts judgment and obtained an interim stay which is yet to be contested by the corporation.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 06 September 2011
So now you have put fact in clean order going through which word by word i am of opinion that delaying the final hearing in the High court is the only life in your case as the disease has become in curable and delaying the hearing is only oxygen available to survive for a few more years months or day depending up on parvi interest of corporation even if it goes up to Apex court.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 06 September 2011
You have a very weak case and you hve even made contempt of court by suppressing material facts from it and have also invited chances to initiate prejury case as you filed a false affidavit therein. You try in high court but beware dont take courts in such light way otherwise you shall hve to repent one day.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 07 September 2011
i have given the full facts of the case. I need advice , i have done this as my family had health problems after moving to this flat and upon the advice of vasthu experts i closed the balconies.
girish shringi
(Expert) 09 September 2011
Vastu can't say to close the balcony,however it always advice to have clear sunshine in the house and that will give you peace.
You have done a wrong in both the way and that's why you are in trouble remove the cover of the balcony and see the result.
AS you stated that due to Vastu you did this,could it be right then you could not have trouble to reach up to High court,then it could have fetched you good life and no tension or expenses which you have incurred for the litigation.
I hope instead of fighting for wrong cause you better contact a perfect VASTUSHASTRI to make remedy for it.THat is proper Vastu shanti.
girish shringi
(Expert) 09 September 2011
Vastu can't say to close the balcony,however it always advice to have clear sunshine in the house and that will give you peace.
You have done a wrong in both the way and that's why you are in trouble remove the cover of the balcony and see the result.
AS you stated that due to Vastu you did this,could it be right then you could not have trouble to reach up to High court,then it could have fetched you good life and no tension or expenses which you have incurred for the litigation.
I hope instead of fighting for wrong cause you better contact a perfect VASTUSHASTRI to make remedy for it.THat is proper Vastu shanti.
If you need any such advice my best friend is the VASTU EXPERT who can advice you perfectly if you like to contact: girishshringi@gmail.com
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 10 September 2011
As I believe in the vasthu expert who is known to us and who gives us good advice we have approached him who suggested the closing of the south (not east) and west side of the balconies.
So, is there any hope for us in the Supreme Court if the C.R.P is vacated in the High Court or is there a chance for me to approach the division bench in the High Court.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 10 September 2011
What does your Vasthu expert say now.
Guest
(Expert) 10 September 2011
The querist preferred to post in pieces.
However, Vastu does not override the rules and regulations of the civic body about taking approval on construction, additions & alterations, even if the flat is on a freehold basis.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 11 September 2011
In the OS before the VIth Junior civil Judge, I did not mention that there is a WP and CC pending in the high court is because my prayer was for the arbitary actions of the muncipal corporation which has threatened demolition without following the due process of the corporation acts and without giving proper notice.
They threatened to pull down the structure and when we resisted they gave us a final notice asking us to pull down the structure within three days.
Against this arbitary actions of the corporation we seeked an ad-interim injuction. We did not have any malafide intention to conceal the matterial facts that there is a case pending in the high court.
The standing counsel of the corporation argued that we have concealed the matterial facts and got the interim stay vacated.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 12 September 2011
Can Concealing the matterial fact in the O.S unintentionally would constitute prejury.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 12 September 2011
Can Concealing the matterial fact in the O.S unintentionally would constitute prejury.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 12 September 2011
Can Concealing the matterial fact in the O.S unintentionally would constitute prejury.
