Clarifying Sudhir Chaks Queries
Mathew Thomas
|
Sender notified by Mailtrack 12/01/19, 12:26:33 |
sudhir chakravarty
Four issues which mainly bug the Purchasers of flats are as under:
- Is the property safe ie Title is free from encumbrance etc? What if builder cheats and later it is found that the property was mortgaged after all the documents submitted by the builder to the authorities is not verified manually or electronically .In other words the authenticity is not checked and verified. which law gives a 100% protection and how?
- Is our money safe? What are the safe guards that I have as regards my money which I invest? What if the builder ploughs the money out to other projects or siphons the money for own use .What are the checks and balances that are available. Which law gives a 100% protection to my money?
- If I have taken a loan and paid certain installments to the builder through bank what If the builder stops construction due to any reason? Should the bank keep on doing electronic transfer to the builder or should I stop the bank from transferring the same? Am I liable to pay back the amounts to the bank even though the constructions have stopped? What about my money already paid to the builder?In that case what about my UDI and portion of construction which has been done so far ? On such occasion Can I sell the property pertaining to my Flat?. If so what is the law?
- Conveyance of common Areas by builder to the society is a big problem. How to ensure smooth transfer of such areas to the society and at what point of time?. Is their any law wherein in the absence of builder not conveying such a land is automatically transferred to the society and at what stage.
These are common problems which are faced by every person .I feel for the moment let us first concentrate on alleviating these burning real problems and issues .We can take up procedural matters later on.
Col Chaks
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2019 12:26 PM
To: Col sudhir Chakraborty; Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS; C N Kumar; Shankar Srinivasan; Muralidhar Rao; Sanjay Vijayaraghavan; sudhir pillai; vidya goggi; Subroto Chakraborty; Ajit Naik
Subject: Clarifying Sudhir Chaks Queries
saju vetiyatil
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lmknv-rera-homebuyer...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-affecting-acts/ME1PR01MB1924A17CAA8F028B5EE9DCB6B6860%40ME1PR01MB1924.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com.
Mathew Thomas
|
|
Sender notified by Mailtrack 14/01/19, 17:18:43 |
Anil Kalgi
Hi Mathew Thomas
People who are advocating KOFA implementation are not opposing RERA implementation. They are of the Opinion that if KOFA is implemented RERA implementation is Incidental.
But People who are proposing Exclusively RERA Implementation are not eager to get implemented KOFA the reasons are best known to them.
The people who are advocating KOFA are trying to voice the grievance of 99% of people home (Flat) Purchasers/ occupiers whose property is already at stake.
The projects which are started after 2016 and which are not complete to the extent of 60% as on May 2016 are only covered by RERA in Karnataka.
Then what happens to the home buyers in the projects which are 1) completed and occupied (OC not Obtained) 2) more that 60% completion as on May 2016? 3) Not legally transferred to the common area to the legal Association
Let me understand your perspective, are they covered under any law and which is that? How to put in use? What has to be done? How one can protect such people rights?
Anil Kalgi
9448822238
|
|
Sender notified by Mailtrack 01/15/19, 12:20:09 AM |
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lmknv-rera-homebuyer...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-affecting-acts/CAMnq8t0uxcUXsSeS5DisRmfVACnBbpwu%2BX7VfTzFHynFW43GbQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
612, 5th Floor, 'O' Block, Platinum City
H M T Road, Yeshwanthpur
Bangalore: 560022
Ph: +91 80 41141275, 9448822238
Ajit Naik
From: Anil Kalgi <kalg...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 at 00:22
Subject: Re: Clarifying Sudhir Chaks Queries
To: Mathew Thomas <mathew...@gmail.com>
Cc: sudhir chakravarty <chak...@hotmail.com>, Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS <lmknv-rera-homebuyer...@googlegroups.com>, C N Kumar <c...@advantageofindia.com>, Shankar Srinivasan <msshan...@gmail.com>, Muralidhar Rao <mura...@gmail.com>, Sanjay Vijayaraghavan <san...@gmail.com>, sudhir pillai <sudhir...@gmail.com>, vidya goggi <vidya...@hotmail.com>, Subroto Chakraborty <such...@gmail.com>, Ajit Naik <ajit....@gmail.com>
Dear Anil Kalgi,
Hi Mathew Thomas
People who are advocating KOFA implementation are not opposing RERA implementation. They are of the Opinion that if KOFA is implemented RERA implementation is Incidental.
For all big projects, RERA is applicable. Here KOFA won't come in picture. If you think, KOFA can come into picture in such big projects, please specifically mention such sections. Who gave the statement, "They are of the Opinion that if KOFA is implemented RERA implementation is Incidental"? Please give reference of such statement/email.
But People who are proposing Exclusively RERA Implementation are not eager to get implemented KOFA the reasons are best known to them.
Please read Part III of my note specifically point No.10(a) to (d) and reconsider your opinion. We are here to discuss on the issues as per RERA Act and specifically section 88 and 89 of RERA and Article 254(1) and decide and not to get divided as RERA supportive or KOFA supportive or KAOA supportive or Housing Cooperative Supportive or KSRA supportive.
The people who are advocating KOFA are trying to voice the grievance of 99% of people home (Flat) Purchasers/ occupiers whose property is already at stake.
But none of them have given clear and concrete solutions for strengthening KOFA. If already made such suggestions are made, please bring to the knowledge of this group again. I repeat such suggestions in my Note Part III, specifically point No.10(a) to (d).
The projects which are started after/before 2016 and which are not complete to the extent of 60% as on May 2016 are only covered by RERA in Karnataka.
Your statement is totally wrong. Where from did you get the above information? Please read Karnataka RERA Rules 4(1) and explanations (i) to (v) to it. It is available in Karnataka RERA website. Please also read from downloads available in RERA website- Press Release. Karnataka RERA Rules 4(1) and explanations are applicable only to the projects where Development work is complete. Here Development work is bothe external and internal development works which are defined in section 2 of RERA.
Then what happens to the home buyers in the projects which are 1) completed and occupied (OC not Obtained) 2) more that 60% completion as on May 2016? 3) Not legally transferred to the common area to the legal Association.
In this regard, (for the projects mentioned above) there is the Bombay High Court Judgement dated 6-1-2017 and the GOK has to implement it. All the projects mentioned by you shall be covered under RERA asper the Bombay High Court Judgement. The hearing in Bombay High Court was conducted as per the direction of Supreme Court to all High Courts to transfer the cases with them on Constitutional validity of RERA act provisions. It is an important judgement. It is important to all of us to get acquainted with Acts, rules and some important judgements before we meet Government Officials and request them to make some changes in the provisions of existing acts/rules/procedures.
Let me understand your perspective, are they covered under any law and which is that? How to put in use? What has to be done? How one can protect such people rights?
My view is to request GOK to follow Housing Cooperatives Rules as per KCSRA-1959, Rules on It and New Model Byelaws of Housing Cooperatives applicable to flats adopted in Maharashtra State after synchronising the same with the KCSRA 159 and Rules on it. These New Model Byelaws are as per the 97 th amendment to the Constitution of India.
I have expressed my view on your email in the group though it was to Co. Mathew Thomas. You can also seek answer from him as the email is directly addressed to him.
Anil Kalgi
9448822238
Ajit N. Naik
Partner@Trialbase
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-affecting-acts/CAOZEeYK8SnooPpmku%2BzonxK_HBbw5-TKWLfDVEHZOwJFSxHFog%40mail.gmail.com.
sudhir chakravarty
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 10:45 PM
To: kalgirti
Cc: Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS; fight-f...@googlegroups.com; Fight for RERA
Subject: Fwd: Clarifying Sudhir Chaks Queries
Shankar Srinivasan
Most of us here are comparing KAO act vs KOFA and RERA.
First and foremost, please realize the fact that, KAO act is a separate legislation, which no way related or comparable with KOFA or RERA.
Taking a quick reference on the comparison table as shared by Shri. Mathew Thomas, KOFA, KAOA and RERA, it is much more evident that, KAOA has no relevance with KOFA or RERA and KAOA is an independent enactment altogether hence the answer in the table “ is silent “.
It is all about submitting the property by the Sole Owners or all of the owners to the provisions of Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act 1972, by duly executing and registering a Declaration as provided in KAO Act and it is nothing to do with Registering the Association and it is misunderstood and wrongly guided by most of the members.
The KAO ACT 1972 describes the necessity for submission of Deed of Declaration, contents of Deed of Declaration, Contents of Bye laws, obligations of Apartment Owners, sharing on common expenses by Apartment Owners, etc.
It is very clear that this Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act 1972, is for maintenance of Apartments, POST possession of Apartments of all Owners.
Hence, KAOA (The Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act 1972) is not pertaining to Registration of Apartment Owners Association.
Also refer to the FAQ issued by: https://www.karnataka.gov.in/karigr/Documents/Registration%20of%20Flats%20and%20Apartments.pdf
Q 1 What are the cases to which the Apartment Act is applicable ?
Ans The Act is applicable in cases where owner or all owners sign the required declaration and register the same as provided in the act. It applies to the
apartments used for residential purpose
Q 4 How to acquire ownership under Apartment Act?
Ans The deed of apartment should be signed and registered (Please see Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act 1972 and Rules 1975 for details)
Q10
Is it not possible to become owner of flat/apartment by purchasing undivided interest in land only,through a sale deed ?
Ans It is not possible to become owner of flat/apartment by describing only undivided interest in land in the sale deed.
Q 11
What are the precautions to be taken while purchasing flat/ apartment?
Ans : (vii) Verify whether deed of declaration and Co-operative society or company is formed and registered.
KAOA completes the process of creating proper “title “of the flat by registering the Deed of Declaration in Form “A” by sole owners or by all Owners and execution of Form “B” and Deed of apartment by all Owners.
It is the responsibility of the Builders to prepare and register the Deed of Declaration in form “A” with Sub Registrar office along with its bylaws.
This deed of declaration need to be registered by the Builders much before conveying the sale deed to the individual home buyers and reference of this Registered Deed of declaration to be mentioned in the Sale deed.
Subsequently every individual Owners need to submit a declaration in Form “B” upon registering the sale deed and Deed of Apartment.
The Builder should hand over the Registered Deed of Declaration and Form “B” along with the registered byelaws, upon forming the Association of Owners, under Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act 1959 or under Company’s Act 2013. (Earlier 1959).
The Association Managing Committee shall submit the certified copies of Deed of Declaration, Byelaws and Form “B” to the competent authority, within 30 days* of its first General Body meeting , and this completes the process of KAOA.
However, in case of any genuine deficiency observed in the Deed of declaration and byelaws, it is interpreted by Legal experts, that , those deficiencies can be approved/amended in the first General Body of the Association, re-registered with the authorities concerned . Logically, I stand with this interpretation as well.
Current Scenario:
The Builders (Sole owners) are not registering the Deed of Declaration in “Form A” before sale deed registration and only few reputed Builders does this.
Hence, the All owners are put in to hardship and the KAO Act is interpreted now and few Legal experts are of the opinion that all owners now can jointly complete the process of creating proper “title “to the apartment by submitting the Deed of declaration and registering the byelaws with 2/3 rd. majority of Owners joining to- gather in the Sub-Registrar office and however, this process is continued till achieving 100% of the owners submits the Deed of Declaration.
To complete this process by all owners, a special power of Attorney is obtained for specific purpose of submitting the Deed of declaration and signing of “form B”. There is a lot of difference of opinion in this process but, logically I find no harm in following this process as there is no other option available.
Further the Association has to be registered either under Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act 1959 or as per Companies Act 2013.
Only upon registering either with Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act 1959 or as per Companies Act 2013, the Owners have grievance redressal option to approach the concerned Registrars with their complaints about their Management Committee’s function, duties, Challenging the elections, decisions, etc. as per the Byelaws or MOA without approaching the Court of Law.
The Association Managing Committee shall submit the certified copies of Deed of Declaration, Byelaws and Form “B” , to the competent authority – Registrar of Co-operative societies, within 30 days* of its first General Body meeting , and this completes the process of KAOA.
While Registrar of co-operative society is named as competent authority as per KAO Act 1972, but his duties, rules and regulations are not elaborated.
Of course there are lacunae in KAO Act 1972, which need to be addressed by proper amendments as it is 45 years old Legislation, which never underwent any amendments. Hence, we must look on below implementation / enforcement Lacunae of Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act 1972:
Lacunae 1:
3 (f) “common areas and facilities” unless otherwise provided in the Declaration or lawful amendments thereto,.
This is very critical and the Builder may intentionally, few areas keep out of "common area" definition, it will play havoc with this protection:
Lacunae 2 :
The Role and responsibilities of the competent authorities to be elaborated further with rules and regulations.
Lacunae 3 :
The Sub-registrar offices to be strictly advised to track the details of Deed of Declaration reference while registering the sale deed pertaining to Apartments. Hence this should be made mandatory to mention in the schedule exclusively.
Suggestion 1 :
Govt. of Karnataka should come out with a scheme to bring all the apartment in to the provisions of KAO Act , where the Builders have failed in their responsibilities to submit the D O D and Bye laws.
Suggestion 2 :
GOK can also bring all commercial properties, like Maharashtra, under this ACT by suitably amending it. {Provided that, no property shall be submitted to the provisions of this Act, 3 ( unless it is used or proposed to be used for residence, office, practice of any profession
or for carrying on any occupation, trade or business or for any other type of independent use ) }
Let us work further on identifying the lacunae and suggesting the practical amendments to the KAO ACT instead of harping around on.
M.S.SHANKAR
Note:
Let us proceed further to discuss on KCS and Companies Act applicability and its Lacunae and suggestions.
RERA will overrule KOFA on its applicability where it conflicts and contravenes and however, KOFA will be in place, to cover those projects which is not covered under RERA.
In spite of fact that, while KOFA is in place for 4 decades, none of us have seen its practical application and enforcement to protect the Buyers and it remained all these years as “ paper tiger” and let it continue.
From: Mathew Thomas
[mailto:mathew...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2019 12:27 PM
To: Col sudhir Chakraborty; Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike -
RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS; C N Kumar; Shankar Srinivasan;
Muralidhar Rao; Sanjay Vijayaraghavan; sudhir pillai; vidya goggi; Subroto
Chakraborty; Ajit Naik
Subject: Clarifying Sudhir Chaks Queries
Shankar Srinivasan
Kindly Refer RERA Act Section 3 (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), no registration of the real estate project shall be required—
(a) where the area of land proposed to be developed does not exceed five hundred square meters or the number of apartments proposed to be developed does not exceed eight inclusive of all phases:
Provided that, if the appropriate Government considers it necessary, it may, reduce the threshold below five hundred square meters or eight apartments, as the case may be, inclusive of all phases, for exemption from registration under this Act;
M.S.Shankar
Error! Filename not specified.
Saturday, 12 Jan 2019
Hi,
I have attached a 'Table of Comparison' between RERA, KAOA and KOFA which, perhaps answers most of Sudhir's questions.
--
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-affecting-acts/ME1PR01MB1924A9928A5CAF2DEFEB03D4B6820%40ME1PR01MB1924.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com.
Shiva Kumar
Advocate & Central Govt. Standing Counsel,
No.483, Ground Floor, 'F'Block,
Sahakaranagar, Bangalore - 560 092.
Tel: 080 - 41680447
Mobile: +91-9731000789.
e-Mail: legaladv...@gmail.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lmknv-rera-homebuyer...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-affecting-acts/!%26!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAGqF5/%2BcEJhAvIYAnrHSOH4igQAAEAAAAKRdzkd/P9hClY1RojlMBuYBAAAAAA%3D%3D%40gmail.com.
Ajit Naik
Ajit Naik
Anil Kalgi
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-affecting-acts/CAOZEeYJd0jf%2Bp_aNZR1CLy8rub77EXtqp4RhoauQc1%3DjvDsO5A%40mail.gmail.com.
Ajit Naik
--
the receipants are requested take appropriate decisions based on the email which are being initiated by the members of RERA- Karnataka. The Manager and or Owner and Members who post such materials and guidance are not responsible for any such act that may have prompt the receipants to take or to be taken.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fight for RERA - Karnataka Chapter" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rera-for-karnat...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rera-for-karnataka.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rera-for-karnataka/CAGsrcsdZ4-uFvu0j7HKWOUNQ14WtnS34e-tkSQCEL64_gPR8XQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Mathew Thomas
Wednesday, 16 January 2019
Hi Anil,
I am really thankful to you for writing to me seeking my perspectives and suggestions for solutions for home-buyers’ problems.
I am glad to respond.
I am a victim thrice over of the unethical and illegal practices of the real estate industry.
Right now one of my cases is before the NCRDC, and this, after having a decree of ₹ 50, lakhs in my favour.
In an old case, in 1995, I lost ₹ 2 lakhs when my advocate cheated me and gave my original documents to the opposite party.
In my present house, I have filed a complaint with RERA and also a writ in the High Court to declare KAOA and KOFA as unconstitutional and quash the circular issued by Registrar of Co-operative Societies.
Now, to respond to your specific points, here they are:
Your Point 1. They are of the Opinion that if KOFA is implemented RERA implementation is Incidental.
1. RERA is a Central Act. It cannot be incidental to a State Act. It overrides the state Act. The state is to implement the law as enacted by Parliament.
Your Point 2. People who are proposing Exclusively RERA Implementation are not eager to get implemented KOFA
2. KOFA is an Act that is intended to give control of the construction and sale processes to builders / promoters. Reading of Sections 10 and 11 makes this clear. Under Section 11, KOFA, apartment owners do not even get title to their apartments. They get shares in a co-operative society or company which the builder / promoter sets up as soon as minimum number required to form co-operative society or company have taken flats. For a co-operative society this number is 10 and for a company it is even 1. Those who are pushing for KOFA should realise that if the builder / promoter forms a company and issues shares and controls the company to who the property – common areas and apartments belongs – and apartment owners only get a share each, what would be the situation. It is the same if he / she chooses to form a co-operative society.
Your Point 3. My perspective
3. I spell it out here.
a. Any project for which completion certificate and / or OC has not been issued should be registered under RERA, even if occupied. I am occupying a house in a layout for which completion has not been issued and a “partial OC” obtained.
b. There is no such thing as “partial OC’ in any law. It is mentioned in Karnataka Real Estate (R & D) Rules, 2017 [KRE (R & D) Rules, 2017]. A Rule made by a state to implement a Central or State Act cannot overrule the Acts.
c. The “sixty percent” completion is also mentioned in the same “explanation” in Rule 4. It is ridiculous.
Your Point 4. are they (my perspectives) covered under any law and which is that?
4. My views are based on the Rule of Law, basic principles of jurisprudence, and specifically, the laws relating to the hierarchy of law – Article. 254 (1) and (2), to property and construction law– RERA, The Contract Act, The Transfer of Property Act, the unconstitutionality of KAOA and KOFA under Articles 19 (c) and 21 of the Constitution.
Your Points 5. How to put in use? 6. What has to be done? 7. How one can protect such people rights?
5. We may take several steps. Here are few suggestions.
a. Start a campaign against bad laws and unscrupulous builders / promoters.
b. For this Create public awareness by holding events, writing in journals, using social media etc.
c. Form a group or association to take up the cause
d. Engage with political and bureaucratic establishment
e. Seek judicial remedies (I have done that. My purpose in accepting Ajit’s invitation was to seek support from BAF to take up this cause.)
Regards,
Mathew
|
|
Sender notified by Mailtrack 16/01/19, 20:09:20 |
Shankar Srinivasan
RERA Section : 17. (1) The promoter shall execute a registered conveyance deed in favour of the allottee along with the undivided proportionate title in the common areas to the association of the allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be, and hand over the physical possession of the plot, apartment of building, as the case may be, to the allottees and the common areas to the association of the allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be, in a real estate project, and the other title documents pertaining thereto within specified period as per sanctioned plans as provided under the local laws:
Provided that, in the absence of any local law, conveyance deed in favour of the allottee or the association of the allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be, under this section shall be carried out by the promoter within three months from date of issue of occupancy certificate.
- The same section 17 (1) continue to say that- Provided that in the absence of any local law, conveyance deed in favour of the allottee or the association or the competent authority, as the case may be, under this section shall be carried out by the promoter within 3 months from date of issue of occupancy certificate.
- If in case there is no provision for registering conveyance deed in favour of Association, ( this provision is not there now in Karnataka,) conveyance deed in favour of the Allottee ( as usually now how it is being done) or the association…… shall be carried out by the promoter, within 3 months….
- Hence we need not worry, that this section will not make KAO redundant.
- However, RERA may not over ride KAO Act, as this is an exclusive enactment which comes in to vogue only POST Sale / RERA – Handing over of possession and taking over of the maintenance by the association.
M.S.SHANKAR
Ajit Naik
From: Shankar Srinivasan <msshan...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 22:18
Subject: RERA - KARNATAKA CHAPTER KAOA Act - Rera Section 17(1)
To: Ajit Naik <ajit....@gmail.com>, Anil Kalgi <kalg...@gmail.com>
Cc: Shiva Kumar <legaladv...@gmail.com>, Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS <lmknv-rera-homebuyer...@googlegroups.com>, C N Kumar <c...@advantageofindia.com>, Muralidhar Rao <mura...@gmail.com>, Sanjay Vijayaraghavan <san...@gmail.com>, sudhir pillai <sudhir...@gmail.com>, vidya goggi <vidya...@hotmail.com>, Subroto Chakraborty <such...@gmail.com>, RERA for Karnataka <rera-for-...@googlegroups.com>, Col sudhir Chakraborty <chak...@hotmail.com>, Mathew Thomas <mathew...@gmail.com>
RERA Section : 17. (1) The promoter shall execute a registered conveyance deed in favour of the allottee along with the undivided proportionate title in the common areas to the association of the allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be, and hand over the physical possession of the plot, apartment of building, as the case may be, to the allottees and the common areas to the association of the allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be, in a real estate project, and the other title documents pertaining thereto within specified period as per sanctioned plans as provided under the local laws:
Provided that, in the absence of any local law, conveyance deed in favour of the allottee or the association of the allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be, under this section shall be carried out by the promoter within three months from date of issue of occupancy certificate.
Ajit: Proviso Not applicable to us.
- The same section 17 (1) continue to say that- Provided that in the absence of any local law, conveyance deed in favour of the allottee or the association or the competent authority, as the case may be, under this section shall be carried out by the promoter within 3 months from date of issue of occupancy certificate.
Ajit: Proviso Not applicable to us
- If in case there is no provision for registering conveyance deed in favour of Association, ( this provision is not there now in Karnataka,) conveyance deed in favour of the Allottee ( as usually now how it is being done) or the association…… shall be carried out by the promoter, within 3 months….
Ajit: Then, What is the meaning of section 89 of RERA. It is a legal question and GOK should take legal opinion on it. I have unofficially put on motion. Government need not respect our views. They have to take proper legal action. Let there be correct interpretation of RERA provision.
- Hence we need not worry, that this section will not make KAO redundant.
Ajit: Every thing depends on opinion given by the legal cell. We shall also insist for legal opinion rather than doing wrong thing. For laymans reading, there is inconsistency in implementing section 17(1) and KAOA basic principle. Moreover, there is mention of the contents of section 17(1) in three other sections.
- However, RERA may not over ride KAO Act, as this is an exclusive enactment which comes in to vogue only POST Sale / RERA – Handing over of possession and taking over of the maintenance by the association.
Ajit: For answering your above views, please answer my 3 questions in another email.
M.S.SHANKAR
Ajit N. Naik
Mathew Thomas
Wednesday, 16 Jan 2019
Hi Shankar,
I thank you for the email suggesting that KOFA could be ignored and KAOA.
May I respond to various important points and issues you have raised?
1. KAOA and KOFA were enacted on the same day. KOFA preceded KAOA in numbering – KOFA is No. 16 and KOFA is No. 16. It does seem quite unlikely that the two Acts by the same department were enacted by the legislature on the same day, were distinct and separate and had nothing to do with each other.
2. KOFA refers to KAOA being enacted for making apartments heritable and transferable.
3. Objective of KOFA is the “interest of purchasers who advance funds for construction.
4. Contrary to your opinion that KAOA is for maintenance of apartments, the objectives spelt out in the Act is to provide ownership of apartments and make them heritable and transferable.
5. Further, Section 16 (2) of KAOA and paragraph 4 (c) of the bye-laws mentioned under Rule 9 of KAO Rules ONLY talk of maintenance of “common facilities” and NOT of individual apartments? Does it mean that the co-operative society or company of owners cannot maintain individual apartments?
6. Is it not significant that the definition of “apartment” is qualified by the phrase, “used for residential purposes”, in KAOA whereas, a different word, “Flats” has been used for the same type of apartment in KOFA and qualified as used for commercial and residential purposes, that residential use is also included in the said definition?
7. Has it not occurred to anyone why apartments / flats used for commercial purposes in multi-storeyed buildings are heritable and transferable whereas those used for residential purposes in similar buildings are not?
8. So, KOFA applies to apartments under KAOA. Hence, your view that KAOA are separate may need to be revisited.
9. Section 5, KAOA states that ownership of apartments is through “Declaration” and “Deed of Apartment”, “in the manner prescribed”. The “prescription” is in the Rules of the Act (Rules 5 .& 9).
10. Registration of association is the substance of Rule 9, Chapter I to X of KAO Rules. Hence, you may wish to reconsider your view that KAOA is not pertaining to registration of owners’ association.
11. The FAQs you have drawn attention to are particularly useful.
12. Of particular interest are a few of them. FAQ 10 says that one can’t become owner of an apartment by purchase of UDS through a sale deed. This stating the obvious. What about purchasing the apartment as well as the UDS through a sale deed? Can one then become owner of an apartment?
13. FAQ 11 states that the precaution to be taken while purchasing flat / apartment is to verify whether co-operative society or company is formed and registered. Whereas, KAOA is silent on forming these and KOFA states that these are to be formed by the builder / promoter when minimum number of persons required to form co-operative society have taken flats.
14. Answer to FAQ 11 also mentions sale deeds. There is no mention of sale deed either in KAOA or in KOFA or in DoD or DoA. Why is this so?
15. Finally, don’t you think that home-buyers should have a choice of what type of organisation they may form for managing their properties? Should they be constrained to join only a co-operative society or company and that formed by the builder / promoter?
Regards,
Mathew
|
|
Sender notified by Mailtrack 16/01/19, 23:21:27 |
sudhir chakravarty
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 4:03 PM
To: 'sudhir chakravarty'; 'Ajit Naik'; 'kalgirti'
Cc: 'Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS'; fight-f...@googlegroups.com; 'Fight for RERA'
Shankar Srinivasan
Dear Col. Sudhir Chakravarty,
KOFA is not at all applicable to those projects which comes under purview of RERA.
KOFA is a miserably failed enactment which is now overruled by RERA.
KOFA is used like pickle by all stake holders.
M.S.SHANKAR
subroto chakraborty
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-affecting-acts/!%26!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAGqF5/%2BcEJhAvIYAnrHSOH4igQAAEAAAAKuCeG9fvuRImwbtZGoiJnIBAAAAAA%3D%3D%40gmail.com.
sudhir pillai
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-affecting-acts/CALWOC3oXO2UEGwFwBN5OUbA0o_UCyOu45Uy8hh_gi0w2Vmhdkg%40mail.gmail.com.
sudhir pillai
Ajit Naik
From: subroto chakraborty <such...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 18:16
Subject: Re: Clarifying Sudhir Chaks Queries
Cc: chak-sudhir <chak...@hotmail.com>, Retail Ajit Naik-RERA <ajit....@gmail.com>, kalgirti <kalg...@gmail.com>, Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS <lmknv-rera-homebuyer...@googlegroups.com>, <fight-f...@googlegroups.com>, Fight for RERA <fight-for-r...@googlegroups.com>
Dear Mr. Subrato and others
Ajit Naik
sudhir chakravarty
Please clarify the implication of this section/subsection as quoted by you.Correct me if I am wrong that you are meaning the same as as Mr Ajit that "For all big projects, RERA is applicable. Here KOFA won't come in picture."
"
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 5:51 PM
sudhir chakravarty
In response to Mr Shankar my reply is as under:
Dear Col. Sudhir Chakravarty,
KOFA is not at all applicable to those projects which comes under purview of RERA.
This is not a correct statement to make as this issue is already settled and understood in this forum that RERA is in addition to the current laws and overrides in only those cases where there is a conflict between RERA and other laws
KOFA is a miserably failed enactment which is now overruled by RERA.
Can you please tell us how it has failed and is there any authority for the same or is it just a replication of views from the Net,because the parent law MOFA from which it derived has been of great service to Maharashtra and builders have been brought to books
KOFA is used like pickle by all stake holders.
Under adverse circumstances most of us specially the uniformed people have survived on dry chapatis and pickles for days during hostilities and operations .So what could be choice for some, it was a savior for others.Anyway on the point of issue of KOFA /RERA I think these statements are just to cut down the implication of existing laws without any valid reasoning.
M.S.SHANKAR
Col Chaks
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2019 7:13 AM
Shankar Srinivasan
Activists can ensure
(i) to fix challenges to the acts,
(ii) highlight the loose ends and fight to fix the loose ends in ACTs,
(iii) legal validity of ACTS.
(iv) Suggest on improvements to ACTs,
(v) Guide citizens on their Rights
The Bombay High Court in its detailed judgment issued on 6-12-2017 while, hearing various challenges to RERA Act , in which we FPCE ( Forum for Peoples collective Efforts ) have voluntarily impleaded ourselves, on behalf the Homebuyers, across the country, has upheld the constitutional validity of first proviso to Section 3(1), Section 3(2)(a), explanation to Section 3, Section 4(2)(l)(C),Section 4(2)(l)(D), Section 5(3) and the first proviso to Section 6, Sections7, 8, 18, 22, 38, 40, 59, 60, 61, 63, 64 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Your RERA rights as per Section 3 has been restored and established.
It is failure of the Homebuyers to fight for their ( RERA ) rights and looking for some remedy ( KOFA ) to resolve their issues.
Time and again, from the day one, ( 10th July 2017 when Karnataka notified their diluted KRERA rules) we have been advising all homebuyers, to not to take cognizance of the diluted Rules and fight for your RERA rights, as per ACT.
Any projects, irrespective of its age of construction, if not received the Occupancy certificate, If internal and external development as mentioned in the RERA acts are not completed, if the Developers have not handed over the original title and relevant documents to the Association of Owners, and you can fight for your RERA rights.
( An expert legal opinion is required, to know how RERA can protect you , if you are already taken possession /living there without OC )
We have not seen anyone fighting for their RERA rights in all available forum.
I have seen many reference about MOFA and case laws pertaining to MOFA. Can anyone from this group point out any such judgment and complaints pending for KOFA.
There are around 600 + judgments , and there are 1000+ complaints pending with RERA authority for adjudication. Is this not sufficient to establish that RERA overruled KOFA.
Please let me know, what exactly the members here are expecting from KOFA to happen now, which has not happened in last 40 + years ?
M.S.Shankar
Ajit Naik
From: sudhir chakravarty <chak...@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 07:35
Subject: Re: Clarifying Sudhir Chaks Queries
To: Shankar Srinivasan <msshan...@gmail.com>, Ajit Naik <ajit....@gmail.com>, kalgirti <kalg...@gmail.com>
Cc: Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS <lmknv-rera-homebuyer...@googlegroups.com>, fight-f...@googlegroups.com <fight-f...@googlegroups.com>, Fight for RERA <fight-for-r...@googlegroups.com>
In response to Mr Shankar my reply is as under:
Dear Col. Sudhir Chakravarty,
KOFA is not at all applicable to those projects which comes under purview of RERA.
This is not a correct statement to make as this issue is already settled and understood in this forum that RERA is in addition to the current laws and overrides in only those cases where there is a conflict between RERA and other laws.
(1) Sir, we have to choose the best act which helps to minimise the apartment buyers.
Among all the provisions of KOFA, the following section 7(1)(ii) is more beneficial to apartment buyers than the provisions in RERA. But it has certain practical difficulties of implementation.
7(1). After plans and specifications are disclosed no alterations or
additions without consent of persons who have agreed to take the flats;
and defects noticed within a year to be rectified.-
(ii) any other alterations in the structure of the building, or construct any additional structures, without the previous consent of all the persons who have agreed to take the flats.
(2) Sir show to this group one provision in KOFA which is more favourable/beneficial than RERA for RERA registered project. Based on your reply comment, we may discuss further. There may not be conflicts in the provisions of KOFA and RERA. We have to chose which is more beneficial to homebuyers.
KOFA is a miserably failed enactment which is now overruled by RERA.
Can you please tell us how it has failed and is there any authority for the same or is it just a replication of views from the Net,because the parent law MOFA from which it derived has been of great service to Maharashtra and builders have been brought to books.
Sir, it has failed because for 38 years after enactment of the Act, Government of Karnataka was not aware which department was responsible to implement KOFA. Refer KIC Case No. KIC PTN 3658 2009 filed by the member of this group. I have mentioned on it many times.. Rule No. 9 of KOFA has no relevence to the Main Act, KOFA and also some part of Rule 5. When the rules and acts of KOFA have no relevance, how it can be implemented ? In Maharashtra, they amended MOFA for 23 times since 1963 to 2008. In Karnataka, Government totally forgotten the existence of the act for 38 years until Mr. C. N. Kumar filed his KIC case in 2009. Even today, many activists in this group don't agree on the goofing done in passing the KOFA by copying KOFA. Goofing continued in adopting the Rules on KOFA.
KOFA is used like pickle by all stake holders.
Under adverse circumstances most of us specially the uniformed people have survived on dry chapatis and pickles for days during hostilities and operations .So what could be choice for some, it was a savior for others.Anyway on the point of issue of KOFA /RERA I think these statements are just to cut down the implication of existing laws without any valid reasoning.
If any one thing is good in existing KOFA, let us insist GOK to implement it. Please show one such extremely good clause in KOF better than RERA.
Regards,
Ajit N. Naik
M.S.SHANKAR
Col Chaks
Ajit Naik
From: Shankar Srinivasan <msshan...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 15:57
Subject: RERA - KARNATAKA CHAPTER KAOA Act
Most of us here are comparing KAO act vs KOFA and RERA.
First and foremost, please realize the fact that, KAO act is a separate legislation, which no way related or comparable with KOFA or RERA.
Ajit: Agree
Taking a quick reference on the comparison table as shared by Shri. Mathew Thomas, KOFA, KAOA and RERA, it is much more evident that, KAOA has no relevance with KOFA or RERA and KAOA is an independent enactment altogether hence the answer in the table “ is silent “.
It is all about submitting the property by the Sole Owners or all of the owners to the provisions of Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act 1972, by duly executing and registering a Declaration as provided in KAO Act and it is nothing to do with Registering the Association and it is misunderstood and wrongly guided by most of the members.
Ajit: Agree
The KAO ACT 1972 describes the necessity for submission of Deed of Declaration, contents of Deed of Declaration, Contents of Bye laws, obligations of Apartment Owners, sharing on common expenses by Apartment Owners, etc.
Ajit: Agree
It is very clear that this Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act 1972, is for maintenance of Apartments, POST possession of Apartments of all Owners.
Ajit: Agree.
Hence, KAOA (The Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act 1972) is not pertaining to Registration of Apartment Owners Association.
Ajit: Disagree. What is that Byelaws attached to Deed of Declaration alongwith Copy of the Sanctioned plan and schedule list of UDS of all apartments?
Also refer to the FAQ issued by: https://www.karnataka.gov.in/karigr/Documents/Registration%20of%20Flats%20and%20Apartments.pdf
(vii) Verify whether deed of declaration and Co-operative society or
company is formed and registered.
The 'and' word has to be changed as 'or'
Q 1 What are the cases to which the Apartment Act is applicable ?
Ans The Act is applicable in cases where owner or all owners sign the required declaration and register the same as provided in the act. It applies to the
apartments used for residential purpose
Q 4 How to acquire ownership under Apartment Act?
Ans The deed of apartment should be signed and registered (Please see Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act 1972 and Rules 1975 for details)
Q10
Is it not possible to become owner of flat/apartment by purchasing undivided interest in land only,through a sale deed ?
Ans It is not possible to become owner of flat/apartment by describing only undivided interest in land in the sale deed.
Q 11
What are the precautions to be taken while purchasing flat/ apartment?
Ans : (vii) Verify whether deed of declaration and Co-operative society or company is formed and registered.
(vii) Verify whether deed of declaration and Co-operative society or company is formed and registered.
1) The 'and' word has to be changed as 'or'
2)Department of IGRS has not understood KAOA properly. Had the department understood the KAOA Act properly, they would have maintained the index register of Declarations under KAOA registered with them and also on Deed of Apartment as per KAOA.
3) I have already explained how GOK goofed while framing the rules on KOFA without linking it to KAOA in the main act (KOFA) as done in Maharashtra. Please read Maharashtra Act (MOFA) section 10(2) carefully which is reproduced below.
10(2) If any property consisting of building or buildings is constructed or to be constructed and the promoter submits such property to the provisions of the Maharashtra Apartment
Ownership Act, 1970, by executing and registering a Declaration as provided by that Act then the promoter shall inform the Registrar as define in the Maharashtra Co operative
Societies Act, 1960, accordingly; and in such cases, it shall not be lawful to form any cooperative society or company.
KAOA completes the process of creating proper “title “of the flat by registering the Deed of Declaration in Form “A” by sole owners or by all Owners and execution of Form “B” and Deed of apartment by all Owners.
Ajit: Partially Correct. Entire Set of the Declaration (along with byelaws and other documents have to be filed with ROCS.
It is the responsibility of the Builders to prepare and register the Deed of Declaration in form “A” with Sub Registrar office along with its bylaws.
This deed of declaration need to be registered by the Builders much before conveying the sale deed to the individual home buyers and reference of this Registered Deed of declaration to be mentioned in the Sale deed.
Subsequently every individual Owners need to submit a declaration in Form “B” upon registering the sale deed and Deed of Apartment.
The Builder should hand over the Registered Deed of Declaration and Form “B” along with the registered byelaws, upon forming the Association of Owners, under Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act 1959 or under Company’s Act 2013. (Earlier 1959).
Ajit: This statement is wrong. Already explained above.
The Association Managing Committee shall submit the certified copies of Deed of Declaration, Byelaws and Form “B” to the competent authority, within 30 days* of its first General Body meeting , and this completes the process of KAOA.
However, in case of any genuine deficiency observed in the Deed of declaration and byelaws, it is interpreted by Legal experts, that , those deficiencies can be approved/amended in the first General Body of the Association, re-registered with the authorities concerned . Logically, I stand with this interpretation as well.
Ajit: It has been tested wrong in a case filed in Bombay High Court.
Paul Parambi, Chief Promoter, Springs CHS Ltd. & Another v/s The Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. & Another Writ Petition No. 2034 of 2016 Decided On, 16 December 2016-
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/58be5cd14a9326199e6a68d4
Current Scenario:
Ajit: In view of the following judgement what is discussed under Current Scenario is totally wrong and unscrupulous Advocates are troubling the Apartment Buyers like unscrupulous builders.
Paul Parambi, Chief Promoter, Springs CHS Ltd. & Another v/s The
Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. & Another Writ Petition
No. 2034 of 2016 Decided On, 16 December 2016-
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/58be5cd14a9326199e6a
The above view is supported by the following judgement.
There are many judgements of High Courts and Supreme Courts stating that When a statute describes or requires a thing to be done in a particular
manner; it should be done in that manner or not at all. One of the judgements is:
State of Kerala & others vs M/S Kerala Rare Earth & Minerals ... on 8 April 2016
Dear Shankar,
Let us not be a party for misguiding on KAOA and KOFA.
With Regards,
Ajit N. Naik
From: Mathew Thomas
[mailto:mathew...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2019 12:27 PM
To: Col sudhir Chakraborty; Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike -
RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS; C N Kumar; Shankar Srinivasan;
Muralidhar Rao; Sanjay Vijayaraghavan; sudhir pillai; vidya goggi; Subroto
Chakraborty; Ajit Naik
Subject: Clarifying Sudhir Chaks Queries
Saturday, 12 Jan 2019
Hi,
I have attached a 'Table of Comparison' between RERA, KAOA and KOFA which, perhaps answers most of Sudhir's questions.
--
|
|
Sender notified by |
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fight for RERA - Karnataka Chapter" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rera-for-karnat...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rera-for-karnataka.
sudhir chakravarty
Further, my response in black
In response to Mr Shankar my reply is as under:
Dear Col. Sudhir Chakravarty,
KOFA is not at all applicable to those projects which comes under purview of RERA.
This is not a correct statement to make as this issue is already settled and understood in this forum that RERA is in addition to the current laws and overrides in only those cases where there is a conflict between RERA and other laws.
(1) Sir, we have to choose the best act which helps to minimise the apartment buyers.
Among all the provisions of KOFA, the following section 7(1)(ii) is more beneficial to apartment buyers than the provisions in RERA. But it has certain practical difficulties of implementation.
7(1). After plans and specifications are disclosed no alterations or additions without consent of persons who have agreed to take the flats; and defects
noticed within a year to be rectified.-
(ii) any other alterations in the structure of the building, or construct any additional structures, without the previous consent of all the persons who have agreed to take the flats.
(2) Sir show to this group one provision in KOFA which is more favourable/beneficial than RERA for RERA
registered project. Based on your reply comment, we may discuss further. There may not be conflicts in the provisions of KOFA and RERA. We have to chose which is more beneficial to homebuyers.
The question was not that which and what is beneficial ,but a blind statement was made that KOFA is not applicable to ongoing RERA projects which was answered.
KOFA is a miserably failed enactment which is now overruled by RERA.
Can you please tell us how it has failed and is there any authority for the same or is it just a replication of views from the Net,because the parent law MOFA from which it derived has been of great service to Maharashtra and builders have been brought to books.
Sir, it has failed because for 38 years after enactment of the Act, Government of Karnataka was not aware which department was responsible to implement KOFA. Refer KIC Case No. KIC PTN 3658 2009 filed by the member of this group. I have mentioned on it many times.. Rule No. 9 of KOFA has no relevence to the Main Act, KOFA and also some part of Rule 5. When the rules and acts of KOFA have no relevance, how it can be implemented ? In Maharashtra, they amended MOFA for 23 times since 1963 to 2008. In Karnataka, Government totally forgotten the existence of the act for 38 years until Mr. C. N. Kumar filed his KIC case in 2009. Even today, many activists in this group don't agree on the goofing done in passing the KOFA by copying KOFA. Goofing continued in adopting the Rules on KOFA.
Consider a situation where exams are to be held and arrangements have been made but students don't go to take exams,will you blame the System or the Students? If the patient does not go to the Doctor can you blame the Medical profession for that ?Similarly if you don't go to court and take advantage of the laws, can you say that the laws have failed you ?The authorities in Govt offices keep changing and because we haven't bothered to change they also do not bother.In Maharashtra these changes have come because people agitated for a change .I again give the example of letter of 30 Nov by Registrar KSRA. See how just the two people got the changes made with a 'silent efficiency'.If our own initiative is missing/lacking then systems cannot be blamed.
Hence it is difficult
to digest that KOFA has failed as fait-Accompli
.
KOFA is used like pickle by all stake holders.
Under adverse circumstances most of us specially the uniformed people have survived on dry chapatis and pickles for days during hostilities and operations .So what could be choice for some, it was a savior for others.Anyway on the point of issue of KOFA /RERA I think these statements are just to cut down the implication of existing laws without any valid reasoning.
If any one thing is good in existing KOFA, let us insist GOK to implement it. Please show one such extremely good clause in KOF better than RERA.
Mr Ajit,
again the same question comes ,the Govt has never stopped KOFA by repeal etc.It is still very much Active.So no permission of Govt is required to be obtained .You have to avail of of laws including RERA etc and implement it yourself .I am very comfortable
with KOFA because I have used all the teeth in it to bring the builder under the guillotine of Law and
cognizance has been taken by the trial court after
voluminous charge sheets have been filed by the police .Although the police, judges etc
were hearing for the first time about KOFA ,but upon arguments made my me took cognizance of the offences.Builder tried few times to compromise but firstly none of the
Offences in KOFA are 'compoundable' means there is no chance of a compromise and secondly
,for posterity sake I wanted such errant people who cheat the public to be hanged under the existing laws.System provides it and I have availed it.Here KOFA has not failed
me .After that a few followed suit and the builders are in the same trial court all the time running for bail etc.
As if the above was not enough under the prevailing laws the builder also has been booked by the Enforcement directorate (ED) under the "Prevention of money laundering Act" on the cognizance taken by trial court pertaining to my case .
Incidentally, now under KOFA laws, around 700 to 800 cases are in Consumer,Trial court (civil),writ petition and Trial court (Criminal) and some one has just made blind statements challenging that there are no cases under KOFA and so KOFA has failed !!!! .
The salutatory effects of KOFA also cannot be overlooked .As one example, Builders were randomly cancelling Agreements for making more money .Now when the criminal court under KOFA was moved such cancellations totally stopped. If people would have moved courts on time and availed the benefits of KOFA ,perhaps it would have prevented other builders from doing illegal acts .The system did not fail you but you failed the system !!!!
The idea is not to show case personal achievements and bravados but just to understand that Laws are available but you have to avail of them and if you haven't, you have to be blamed and not the system.
Note : Ps refer the word 'You' to mean general public and not any individual!!
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2019 1:35 AM
To: RERA-Subrato Chakravarthy; Shankar Srinivasan; Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS; fight-f...@googlegroups.com; Fight for RERA
sudhir pillai
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lmknv-rera-homebuyer...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-affecting-acts/CAOZEeY%2B%2BzeKpAQU8%3DdzAj%3DT6kTymo-EyvbjJkr9BOqHMVhWLBw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Ajit Naik
From: sudhir chakravarty <chak...@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 08:31
Subject: Re: Clarifying Sudhir Chaks Queries
To: Ajit Naik <ajit....@gmail.com>, RERA-Subrato Chakravarthy <such...@gmail.com>, Shankar Srinivasan <msshan...@gmail.com>, Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS <lmknv-rera-homebuyer...@googlegroups.com>, fight-f...@googlegroups.com <fight-f...@googlegroups.com>, Fight for RERA <fight-for-r...@googlegroups.com>
Further, my response in black
In response to Mr Shankar my reply is as under:
Dear Col. Sudhir Chakravarty,
KOFA is not at all applicable to those projects which comes under purview of RERA.
This is not a correct statement to make as this issue is already settled and understood in this forum that RERA is in addition to the current laws and overrides in only those cases where there is a conflict between RERA and other laws.
(1) Sir, we have to choose the best act which helps to minimise the apartment buyers.
Among all the provisions of KOFA, the following section 7(1)(ii) is more beneficial to apartment buyers than the provisions in RERA. But it has certain practical difficulties of implementation.
7(1). After plans and specifications are disclosed no alterations or additions without consent of persons who have agreed to take the flats; and defects
noticed within a year to be rectified.-
(ii) any other alterations in the structure of the building, or construct any additional structures, without the previous consent of all the persons who have agreed to take the flats.
(2) Sir show to this group one provision in KOFA which is more favourable/beneficial than RERA for RERA
registered project. Based on your reply comment, we may discuss further. There may not be conflicts in the provisions of KOFA and RERA. We have to chose which is more beneficial to homebuyers.
The question was not that which and what is beneficial ,but a blind statement was made that KOFA is not applicable to ongoing RERA projects which was answered.
Sir, As far as fighting a case in courts KOFA provisions can be used. As far as taking up the issues involved in projects where RERA registration is not done/granted/eligible, all apartment buyers can approach the Concerned Authorities to get benefits of section 5 and 7(4) as per the UDD guidelines issued on 8-3-2012 and 14-3-2012 within the stipulated time period. We are laymen and hence there will be some mistakes in our statements while expressing our views on legal matters.
KOFA is a miserably failed enactment which is now overruled by RERA.
Can you please tell us how it has failed and is there any authority for the same or is it just a replication of views from the Net,because the parent law MOFA from which it derived has been of great service to Maharashtra and builders have been brought to books.
Sir, it has failed because for 38 years after enactment of the Act, Government of Karnataka was not aware which department was responsible to implement KOFA. Refer KIC Case No. KIC PTN 3658 2009 filed by the member of this group. I have mentioned on it many times.. Rule No. 9 of KOFA has no relevence to the Main Act, KOFA and also some part of Rule 5. When the rules and acts of KOFA have no relevance, how it can be implemented ? In Maharashtra, they amended MOFA for 23 times since 1963 to 2008. In Karnataka, Government totally forgotten the existence of the act for 38 years until Mr. C. N. Kumar filed his KIC case in 2009. Even today, many activists in this group don't agree on the goofing done in passing the KOFA by copying KOFA. Goofing continued in adopting the Rules on KOFA.
Consider a situation where exams are to be held and arrangements have been made but students don't go to take exams,will you blame the System or the Students? If the patient does not go to the Doctor can you blame the Medical profession for that ?Similarly if you don't go to court and take advantage of the laws, can you say that the laws have failed you ?The authorities in Govt offices keep changing and because we haven't bothered to change they also do not bother.In Maharashtra these changes have come because people agitated for a change .I again give the example of letter of 30 Nov by Registrar KSRA. See how just the two people got the changes made with a 'silent efficiency'.If our own initiative is missing/lacking then systems cannot be blamed.
Hence it is difficult
to digest that KOFA has failed as fait-Accompli.
Sir, law will be successful when citizens are proactive. Homebuyers are also equally responsible for failure of acts/rules by blindly following it. How many citizens like you can argue the case independently in courts? Sir You have an advantage of 'colonel' prefix to your name to have impression on judges which common person does not have. Additionally you have perfectly studied the Law.
KOFA is used like pickle by all stake holders.
Under adverse circumstances most of us specially the uniformed people have survived on dry chapatis and pickles for days during hostilities and operations .So what could be choice for some, it was a savior for others.Anyway on the point of issue of KOFA /RERA I think these statements are just to cut down the implication of existing laws without any valid reasoning.
If any one thing is good in existing KOFA, let us insist GOK to implement it. Please show one such extremely good clause in KOF better than RERA.
Mr Ajit,
again the same question comes ,the Govt has never stopped KOFA by repeal etc.It is still very much Active.So no permission of Govt is required to be obtained .You have to avail of of laws including RERA etc and implement it yourself .I am very comfortable
with KOFA because I have used all the teeth in it to bring the builder under the guillotine of Law and
cognizance has been taken by the trial court after
voluminous charge sheets have been filed by the police .Although the police, judges etc
were hearing for the first time about KOFA ,but upon arguments made my me took cognizance of the offences.Builder tried few times to compromise but firstly none of the
Offences in KOFA are 'compoundable' means there is no chance of a compromise and secondly
,for posterity sake I wanted such errant people who cheat the public to be hanged under the existing laws.System provides it and I have availed it.Here KOFA has not failed
me .After that a few followed suit and the builders are in the same trial court all the time running for bail etc.
As if the above was not enough under the prevailing laws the builder also has been booked by the Enforcement directorate (ED) under the "Prevention of money laundering Act" on the cognizance taken by trial court pertaining to my case .
Incidentally, now under KOFA laws, around 700 to 800 cases are in Consumer,Trial court (civil),writ petition and Trial court (Criminal) and some one has just made blind statements challenging that there are no cases under KOFA and so KOFA has failed !!!! .
The salutatory effects of KOFA also cannot be overlooked .As one example, Builders were randomly cancelling Agreements for making more money .Now when the criminal court under KOFA was moved such cancellations totally stopped. If people would have moved courts on time and availed the benefits of KOFA ,perhaps it would have prevented other builders from doing illegal acts .The system did not fail you but you failed the system !!!!
The idea is not to show case personal achievements and bravados but just to understand that Laws are available but you have to avail of them and if you haven't, you have to be blamed and not the system.
Agree sir. But one Col. Chakarvarty cannot change it. It is nice to discuss with you. I wish to take your guidance separately on how to take up the case individually in the court so that I too can guide some youngsters on it.
Note : Ps refer the word 'You' to mean general public and not any individual!!
Noted
Regards,
Ajit N. Naik
Anil Kalgi
Ajit Naik
Anil Kalgi
Ajit Naik
Ajit Naik
From: sudhir pillai <sudhir...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 at 08:52
Subject: Re: RERA - KARNATAKA CHAPTER KAOA Act
To: Ajit Naik <ajit....@gmail.com>
Cc: Fight for RERA <fight-for-r...@googlegroups.com>, Lancha Mukta Karnataka Nirmana Vedike - RERA, HOMEBUYERS & AFFECTING ACTS <lmknv-rera-homebuyer...@googlegroups.com>, Shankar Srinivasan <msshan...@gmail.com>, <fight-f...@googlegroups.com>
Sir,
Vishwanath Rao
CN Kumar
Mathew Thomas
|
|
Sender notified by Mailtrack 21/01/19, 12:38:08 |
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lmknv-rera-homebuyers-and-affecting-acts/!%26!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAGqF5/%2BcEJhAvIYAnrHSOH4igQAAEAAAAKaR6jzvFG5HjHjH9NJjG5MBAAAAAA%3D%3D%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.