TRANSFER AND TRANSMISSION OF SHARES IN A COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY.
Today we are going to discuss unique issues relating to a housing society. Human beings when getting even a little bit of power, behave like King-Queen. This is normal psychology. Taking into consideration this psychology and jurisprudence every law is enacted. Now we shall deal with the questions individually WHAT ARE THE PROVISIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TRANSFER/TRANSMISSION OF SHARES UNDER MAHARASHTRA CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LAWS? ( MAHARASHTRA) Following are the relevant provisions of the Maharashtra Housing Society for transfer and transmission of shares and interest in the society. Open membership.— (1) No society shall, without sufficient cause, refuse admission to membership to any person duly qualified therefore under the provisions of this Act and its bye-laws. (1-A) Where a society refuses to accept the application from an eligible person for admission as a member, or the payment made by him in respect of membership, such person may tender an application in such form as may be prescribed together with payment in respect of membership, if any, to the Registrar, who shall forward the application and the amount, if any so paid, to the society concerned within thirty days from the date of receipt of such application and the amount; and thereupon if the society fails to communicate any decision to the applicant within sixty days from the date of receipt of such application and the amount by the society, the applicant shall be deemed to have become a member of such society. If any question arises whether a person has become a deemed member or otherwise, the same shall be decided by the Registrar after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to all the concerned parties. (2) Any person aggrieved by the decision of a society, refusing him admission to its membership, may appeal to the Registrar. Every such appeal, as far as possible, be disposed of by the Registrar within a period of three months from the date of its receipt: Provided that, where such appeal is not so disposed of within the said period of three months, the Registrar shall record the reasons for the delay. (3) The decision of the Registrar in appeal, shall be final and the Registrar shall communicate his decision to the parties within fifteen days from the date thereof: (4) Without prejudice to the foregoing provisions of this section, in the case of agro-processing societies or any other society for which a definite zone or an area of operation is allotted by the State Government or the Registrar, it shall be obligatory on the part of such society to admit, on an application made to it, every eligible person from that zone or the area of operation, as the case may be, as a member of such society, unless such person is already registered as a member of any other such society, into the same zone or the area of operation. Restrictions on transfer or charge on share or interest.— (1) Subject to the provisions of the last preceding section as to the maximum holding of shares and to any rules made in this behalf, a transfer of, or charge on, […]
Read more
DOES THE INVESTOR HAVE A REMEDY AGAINST ERRING BUILDERS UNDER REAL ESTATE AND REGULATION ACT ,2016 ( RERA) ?
To answer this query let us understand the provisions of RERA,2016 2(d) “allottee” in relation to a real estate project means the person to whom a plot, apartment or building, as ,he case may be, has been allotted, sold (whether as freehold or leasehold) or otherwise transferred by the promoter, and includes the person who subsequently acquires the said allotment through sale, transfer or otherwise but does not include a person to whom such plot, apartment or building, as the case may be, is given on rent. FILING OF COMPLAINTS WITH THE AUTHORITY OR THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER (1) Any aggrieved person may file a complaint with the Authority or the adjudicating officer, as the case may be, for any violation or contravention of the provisions of this Act or the Rules and Regulations made thereunder against any promoter allottee or real estate agent as the case may be. Explanation.—For the purpose of this sub-section “person” shall include the association of allottees or any voluntary consumer association registered under any law for the time being in force. (2) The form, manner, and fees for filing a complaint under sub-section (1) shall be such as may be specified by regulations. The first of such complaint was filed before Maharashtra RERA authority in COMPLAINT NO: CC006000000000789 Mahesh Parian vs Monarch Solitaire Facts: The Complainant has invested some amount in the residential Project known as ‘monarch Solitaire’ and reserved four apartments in the said Project in 2014. The said project is registered under MahaRERA registration No. P51700012008. The Complainant stated that after reservation of four apartments, Respondent neither gave his invested money back with interest nor is giving the possession of the apartments earmarked for him. Therefore, he prayed that MahaRERA pass an appropriate order for recovery of the principal amount with interest. Observation: documents entered into between parties Tribunal observed that the Complainant and Respondent have signed a ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ on 12s March 2014 from which it is seen that the Complainant is an investor in the said Project and not an allottee. The ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ mentions that when the complainant sells his apartments in the market then the profit from such a sale will be shared between the complainant and respondent in the ratio of 70:3O”. It means that the Complainant has the status of a ‘Co-promoter’ of the Project, as clarified in MahaRERA circular. NOTE: As per records of Maha-RERA this matter was subsequently withdrawn before Appellate Authority. Can draw a hypothesis that it was settled. Next came was M/s. Srushti Sangam Developers Pvt. Ltd vs Sarvapriya Leasing (P) Ltd. APPEAL NO. 000600000001 0557 Facts: The Promoter was developing a project namely Maulick Enclave at Chembur, Mumbai. lt is a redevelopment project consisting of residential premises and shops and offices. promoter and owner of the land had executed registered agreements of redevelopment in the year 2003. As the project was incomplete on 11 May 2017 i.e. on the day of application of RERA Act 2016. promoter has registered a project with [MahaRERA and it bears registration No. P518000J2986.] The investor cum allottee had paid a total sum of Rs.4,53,71,1001 […]
Read more
ANCIENT INDIA VEDIC USAGE OF CANNABIS AND TODAY’S NARCOTIC SUBSTANCE
When I wrote a negative comment about Aryan Khan on Facebook, I was taken a back by a question why Sadhus drug themselves. This was asked none other than a Hindu may be pseudo-secular or the one who made Khans rule over this country though being Khan by a dialogue “ I am Khan and I am not a terrorist”. Our generation is not knowledgeable may be literate. Literacy means which generates a lot of wealth in terms of money. I then did research and I recalled having read Sam Ved in Gujarati. Som Ras and Som Paan is an integral part of Aryans. Bhang is offered to Lord Shiv as it heals his pain of consuming poisonous substances during Samudra Manthan. In general, devotees offer even milk to relive his sufferings which Lord Shiv consumed to save the universe. Indian history and Hindu Aryan culture have the tradition to use cannabis, bhang, and other plants as medicine. The mention is found in Atharva Ved. There is also mention of Soma Paan by Indra Dev Sukta 56 – 5348. Consumption of Soma Ras made from herbs on the holy mountain of Himalaya gives the different abilities and sparkling personality. It was used as medicine for different diseases and during surgery in ancient India. The mention is in Sushrut Samhita. There is also mention of Madya Paan in Chandipath in Adhyay 3 mantra 34-35 where the supreme powered goddess consumes Madhypan before elimination of devil Mahishasur. Cannabis and its derivatives (marijuana, hashish/charas, and bhang) were legally sold in India until 1985, and their recreational use was commonplace. Consumption of cannabis was not seen as socially deviant behavior and was viewed as being similar to the consumption of alcohol. Ganja and Charas were considered by upper-class Indians as the poor man’s intoxicant, although the rich consumed bhang during Holi. The United States began to campaign for a worldwide law against all drugs, following the adoption of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs in 1961. Article 49 of the Convention required Parties to completely abolish, over a maximum period of 25 years from the coming into force of the Convention, all quasi-medical use of opium, opium smoking, coca leaf chewing, and non-medical cannabis use. All production and manufacture of these drugs were also to be abolished within the same time periods. Only Parties for which such uses were “traditional” could take advantage of the delayed implementation; for others, prohibition was immediate. As the maximum time ended in 1989, these practices are today fully prohibited, and the drugs may be used only for domestically regulated medical and scientific purposes. However, India opposed the move and withstood American pressure to make cannabis illegal for nearly 25 years. American pressure increased in the 1980s, and in 1985, the Rajiv Gandhi government succumbed and enacted the NDPS Act, banning all narcotic drugs in India. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ANCIENT INDIAN CANNABIS AND TODAY’S NARCOTIC SUBSTANCE? In ancient India, Som Paan was enjoyed by supreme lords and kings as they had to fight devils and evil forces, which we discussed above. There was no “Drug abuse” […]
Read more
ABOUT STRIKING DOWN OF 97TH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
Part IXB under the chapter heading ‘The Co-operative Societies’. The Constitution 97th Amendment Act was passed by the requisite majority of the Lok Sabha on 27.12.2011 and the Rajya Sabha on 28th December,2011. The Presidential assent to the aforesaid Amendment followed on 12th January, 2012 and the said Amendment was published in the Official Gazette of India on 13th January,2012, coming into force with effect from 15th February,2012. The 97th Constitutional Amendment was challenged in the matter of Rajendra N Shah v. Union of India 2013 (2) G.L.R. 1698 and the Gujarat High Court allowed the said Public Interest Litigation by declaring that the Constitution 97th Amendment Act, 2011 inserting part IXB containing Articles 243ZH to 243ZT is ultra vires the Constitution of India for not taking recourse to Article 368(2). The important question raised in these petitions and decided by a division bench of the Gujarat High Court by its judgment dated 22nd April,2013 is whether Part IXB is non est for want of ratification by half of the States under the proviso to Article 368(2). The judgment of the High Court has declared that the said constitutional amendment inserting Part IXB is ultra vires the Constitution of India for want of the requisite ratification under Article 368(2) proviso, which however will not impact amendments that have been made in Article 19(1)(c) and in inserting Article 43B in the Constitution of India. That is formation of Associations and States endeavor to promote voluntary associations under Directive Principles. The amendment was carried out in The Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 in consonance with the provisions of 97th Constitutional Amendment which came into effect from 12th January, 2012. The Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Amendment Act came into effect from 13th August, 2013. New Model bye-laws came into force from September 2014, duly approved by the Commissioner for Co-operation and Registrar, C.S., Maharashtra State, Pune. The overall enforcement and application of the old Bye-Laws are the same with certain modifications to be in consonance and in agreement of the 97th amendment to the Constitution of India. NOW LET US SEE GIST OF THE AMENDMENTS UNDER 97th CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS : The Constitution of India is amended by 97th Constitution of Amendment and inserted Part IXB to the Constitution of India, a Chapter relating to the Co-operative Societies. Article 243ZH to 243ZT is inserted by this Amendment Act of 2011 with effect from 15th February 2012. A Chapter defines various terms. Authorized person in Article 243ZH(a). Article 243ZH(b) defined the terms Board and it means the Board of Directors or the Governing body of the Society by whatever name called to whom the control of management of the affairs of the Society is entrusted. Article 243ZH(c) defined the terms Co-operative Society and it means a Society registered or deemed to be registered under any law relating to the Co-operative Societies for the time being in force. Article 243ZH(d) defined the terms Multi-state Co-operative Society and it means whose object is not confined to one State and is registered or deemed to be registered under the law for the time being in force relating to such […]
Read more