PROPERTY LOST/DEMOLISHED IN THE LAKE BED, GOMALA, CIVIC AMENITY SITES, GUNDU THOPU, BDA, KIADB LAND AND OTHER ENCROACHEMENTS SOLD BY LAND MAFIA AND DEVELOPERS = THE LOOSERS/PROPERTY(PRESENT) OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY CAN SUE THE SELLERS/BUILDERS AND RECOVER THE AMOUNT ALONG WITH DAMAGES AND COMPENSATION


HAVE YOU BOUGHT A PROPERTY, WHICH IS TERMED AS ILLEGAL OR IRREGULAR OR SOLD WITH FAKE OR FABRICATED DOCUMENTS OR CLOSE TO RAJA KALUVE OR LAKE?

DO NOT LOOSE HOPE.  THE OWNERS, IF ALL OTHER THINGS ARE GOOD, CAN FIGHT AND INITIATE ACTION AND RECOVER THE LOSS, BASED ON THE DOCUMENTS ON WHICH IT IS BOUGHT. 

YES. YOU CAN FIGHT.  YOU CAN, DEFINITELY TAKE ACTION AGAINST YOUR SELLER. BOTH CRIMINAL AND CIVIL SUITS CAN BE INSTITUTED, SUBJECT TO THE THOROUGH EXAMINATION AND INVESTIGATION OF TITLE DEEDS, APPROVALS AND KATHAS.

BEFORE EMBARKING UPON SUCH EXPENSIVE, TIME CONSUMING, SENSITIVE ISSUE AND FILING OF THE SUIT, ALL THE DETAILS AND DOCUMENTS MUST BE THOROUGHLY VERIFIED AND CHECKED FOR ITS AUTHENTICITY AND GENUINENESS. AN INVESTIGATION ABOUT THE SELLER/PREDECESSOR OF THE PROPERTY AND HIS CURRENT POSITION AND HIS OTHER PROPERTIES AND ACTIVITIES ARE A MUST.

INITIATE APPROPRIATE PROCEEDINGS IMMEDIATELY UPON THE SELLER, THEIR COMPANY, TOWN PLANNING OFFICIALS AND  REVENUE OFFICIALS WITH THOROUGH UNDERSTANDING OF THE KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT, KARNATAKA LAND REFORMS ACT, KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL ACT AND KARNATAKA TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT ALONG WITH APPROPRIATE AND SUSTAINABLE PROVISIONS OF IPC AND CPC.

THE LOOSERS CAN DEFINITELY INITIATE ACTION, HAD THERE BEEN MISREPRESENTATION OF FACTS, FAKE DOCUMENTS, FABRICATED DOCUMENTS, INDEMNITY CLAUSE IN THE ABSOLUTE SALE DEED, NON COMPLIANCE OF CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN THE APPROVALS, PROVIDED HAVE SUFFICIENT FEE PAYING POWER AND TO MEET THE EXPENSES AND FIGHT THE SUIT TILL ITS LOGICAL END.

BUT, IN MOST OF THE CASES OF DC CONVERSION, THE CONDITIONS ARE FLOUTED AND THE BUYERS OR THE OWNERS WILL ALSO BE EFFECTED.  HENCE, A CAREFUL HANDLING OF THE ENTIRE PROCESS IS VERY IMPORTANT.

Advertisements

DID YOU CHECK AND VERIFY THE VAT TAX, SERVICE TAX, BESCOM DEPOSIT AND BWSSB DEPOSIT CHARGED BY THE SELLER/DEVELOPER ?


ONE OF OUR READER HAS DONE A CALCULATION OF VALUE ADDED TAX, SERVICE TAX, BESCOM DEPOSIT, BWSSB DEPOSIT, LEGAL CHARGES, GENERATOR CHARGES, STAMP DUTY AND REGISTRATION FEES, WHICH WORKS OUT AT OVER 20% OF THE STATED OR QUOTED PRICE OF THE PROPERTY, APART FROM THE CHARGES PAID OR PAYABLE FOR OBTAINING THE BANK LOAN, WHICH MAY BE ANOTHER 1/2% OR 1%.

IN SOME CASES, THESE CHARGES AMOUNTED TO OVER 25% AND 75% OF THE CASES, THE BUYERS DO NOT HAVE KATHA FROM BBMP, STILL HAVE TO REMIT THE BETTERMENT CHARGES AND PAY THE KATHA FEE, WHICH WORKS OUT AT APPROXIMATELY AT 1%.

Many of the buyers are under the wrong impression and notion that the approval or sanction of BANK LOAN will confer the best right, title and interest of the property.  IT IS WRONG. 

TAKE CARE. CHECK THE CHARGES. DEMAND THE BILLS. DEMAND THE RECEIPTS. 

AKRAMA-SAKRAMA – GAZETTE NOTIFICATION BY THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT SECRETARIAT ON 28-05-2014- akrama_sakrama_2014-gazette


akrama_sakrama_2014-gazette

THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA HAS ISSUED A GAZETTEE NOTIFICATION OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE KARNATAKA TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING(REGULARISATION OF UNAUTHORISED DEVELOPMENT OR CONSTRUCTION)RULE, 2013.

THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION DATED 28-05-2014

akrama_sakrama_2014-gazette

Akrama-Sakrama-Gazette notification on 28-05-2014-page-1 001

akrama_sakrama_2014-gazette

SOME ARGUMENTS , ANSWERS AND COUNTER ARGUMENTS ABOUT THE CLEARING AND DEMOLITION OF ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION ON THE ENCROACHED LANDS AT BANGALORE


ENCROACHMENT OF LAKE BED CLEARED:

A KATHA AND OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE ISSUED –

ISSUE OF A KATHA DOES NOT ENTITLE ANY PERSON TO OBTAIN A KATHA ON MISREPRESENTATION OF FACTS AND THE KATHA AUTOMATICALLY GETS CANCELLED.

OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED TO THE BUILDINGS WHICH HAVE COMPLIED WITH ALL STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS AND CONSTRUCTED AS PER SANCTIONED PLAN.

DOES OC ALLOW ENCROACHMENT OF GOVERNMENT LANDS?

DOES ALL THESE ARGUMENTS ARE VALID AND HOLD GOOD IN THE EYES OF LAW?

DEFINITELY NO. NEVER.

ANOTHER ARGUMENT PUT FORTH BY THE OWNERS THAT THE ENCROACHMENTS MUST NOT BE REMOVED BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT AWARE, BECAUSE THEY HAVE INVESTED AND IT IS THEIR PROPERTY.

IT MEANS, EVEN, IF THE DEVELOPER OR THE OWNER HAVE ENCROACHED GOVERNMENT LAND STATING THAT THEY ARE NOT AWARE OR IGNORANT ABOUT THE ENCROACHMENT OF GOVERNMENT LAND, HENCE IT IS LEGAL.

 

THE TRUTH:

THE MATTER WAS BEFORE THE HIGH COURT AND THE COURT DIRECTED THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TO CONDUCT A SURVEY.

HOW CAN ANYBODY SAY THAT THEY ARE NOT AWARE?

The answer to your question is in the above article itself: “Chowdegowda, BBMP additional director, Town Planning, said: We issue the plan sanction based on the availability of ‘A’ Khata and later on, occupancy certificate for constructing without deviating from the sanctioned plan.

Town planning officials cannot be held responsible for issuing an occupancy certificate for the allegedly encroached lake land by Developers.”

 

A COMMENT IN ONE OF THE SITES ABOUT THE ISSUE:
In Bangalore’s real estate history, around 00 flat owners of XXXX XXXXXX have decided to file a cheating case against the developers, 14 years after taking possession of their apartments. The decision came after the Bangalore Urban district administration on Tuesday carried out a partial demolition (COMPOUND WALL)of the apartment allegedly constructed on the Iblur lakebed.

A ground + seven floors apartment complex, has been under existence since the year 2001-02. Flat owners’ association president alleged that they had been kept in the dark about a legal battle between the developers and the state government.

Bangalore district incharge minister Ramalinga Reddy told Bangalore Mirror: “The apartments have been built on encroached lakebed land by the developers. A resurvey by the Assistant Commissioner was also done, the encroachment has been confirmed. The Thasildar has gone for demolition after the Lokayukta served a notice on him asking him why no action has been taken. He has to follow orders.”

One of the affected owners said: ”We bought flats by spending our hard-earned money. The Developers never informed us about the alleged encroachment of the lake land.(even though, they were contesting the suit in the court) BBMP has also issued ‘A’ Khata and the town planning department has also given us the occupancy certificate, then how can we have encroached the lake land.”

ISSUE OF A KATHA DOES NOT ENTITLE ANY PERSON TO OBTAIN A KATHA ON MISREPRESENTATION OF FACTS (encroached government lands ) AND THE KATHA AUTOMATICALLY GETS CANCELLED.

OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED TO THE BUILDINGS WHICH HAVE COMPLIED WITH ALL STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS AND CONSTRUCTED AS PER SANCTIONED PLAN.

DOES OC ALLOW ENCROACHMENT OF GOVERNEMENT LANDS?

DOES ALL THESE ARGUMENTS ARE VALID AND HOLD GOOD IN THE EYES OF LAW?

Another flat owner said: “The developer has cheated us. Officials cannot just demolish a part of the apartment. Officials came this morning and pasted the notice on our compound wall. This is not the way to treat tax-payers.”

IGNORANCE OF LAW IS NO EXCUSE- EVERYBODY FEIGNS IGNORANCE, THINKING THAT THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT!!! WHEN THE MATTER WAS BEFORE THE HIGH COURT, HOW CAN THEY SAY, THEY ARE NOT AWARE OR IGNORANT.

HOW TRUE IS THEIR REAL IGNORANCE?

Bangalore urban deputy commissioner’s office Tashildar (enforcement) Chudamani said, ” On Tuesday, around 18 acre of lake land worth Rs 15 crore has been recovered.”

Bangalore South Tahsildar B R Dayanand said, “Everything has been carried out according to the law. The present outer ring road is itself on lake land, but the then cabinet decided to take up the road work. ”

On January 18, 2013, the then Bangalore South Tahsildar had issued orders for recovering lake land, but the process was kept in abeyance. On February 19 this year, Dayanand issued the fresh recovering order which was executed on March 4.

Dayanand said, “Iblur village survey No 36 is a genuine lake land. Two people, Harish Krishna and Papanna, had encroached 81 gunta, while Jacob had encroached 4 gunta, Rajesh Babu 3/4 gunta, Sun City developers 4 gunta, Sobha Developers 4 gunta, Pujari Krishnappa 12 gunta, Flower school 1 gunta, and another person Narasa Reddy has also encroached some land.”

Sobha maintained that their apartment was legal, based on a Plan Sanction bearing P.S/EM/TA-3/E/02-1999-2000, dated 17.11.1999 and an Occupancy Certificate bearing No. BDA/EM/TA-3/T-101/2002-03 dated 05.03.2003 issued by the Bangalore Development Authority. They accused the tashildar of not complying with the orders of the High Court as also the Asst Commissioner. ”Without hearing the owners or providing them with the Survey Report, the tahsildar has pasted a notice dated March 1, 2014.’ ‘ a Sobha representative aid.

A flat owner, said: ”The developer kept us in the dark. The association has decided to take up a legal battle against them.”


The builders made their money, even the investors have offloaded all their units by now and the only one suffering will be the end-users.

ALL IS NOT WELL.

THE OWNERS HAVE OBTAINED A TEMPORARY STAY ORDER FROM THE COURT, NOW, THE BURDEN OF PROOF LIES ON THEM TO PROVE THAT THE SAID LAND IS THEIR OWN AND IT IS NOT AN ENCROACHED LAND.

 

BUILDERS DENIED BAIL FOR SELLING FLAT ON ILLEGAL FLOOR – A NEWS REPORT


READ:

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-12-24/mumbai/45538986_1_aftab-manzil-50-lakh-rizwan-merchant

ONE OF OUR READER INTIMATED US THAT THE NEWS MAY NOT BE TRUE.

HENCE, WE ARE PUBLISHING THIS LINK.

PLEASE READ:

Builders denied bail for selling flat on illegal floor

Shibu Thomas, TNNDec 24, 2013, 02.21AM IST

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court has refused to grant bail to two developers who allegedly cheated a woman by promising her a fifth-floor flat in an under-construction building in Bandra that had permissions only to build up to the third floor.

The builders, Sharif Altaf Furniturewala and his uncle Aftab Latif, have been in jail for two months since their arrest on October 19.

Their claims that the case was a civil one and their offer to return the sum of Rs 50 lakh they had taken from the complainant, Rubina Ansari, failed to impress the court.

One of the two builders, Furniturewalla, was charged earlier this year along with his two brothers after the Aftab Manzil building which they owned in Mahim came crashing down, killing 10 persons, including advocate Rizwan Merchant’s mother, wife and son.

Merchant, who is Ansari’s lawyer in this case, argued it was not a simple case of cheating but part of an “epidemic of illegal constructions in the city”, where an attempt was made to put up a building “up to the 7th floor without there being any sanction from local authorities” with a “design to earn huge profits at the cost of lives of flat purchasers”.

The complaint said Furniturewala and Latif signed an agreement to sell a 600 sq ft flat on the fifth floor of their under-construction seven-storey building Concrete Construction in Bandra to Rubina in 2010. Rubina paid Rs 50 lakh of the total cost of Rs 78 lakh.

However, she soon came to know the building did not have permissions. When her notice for refund of money went unanswered, she lodged a criminal complaint with the police.

Rubina’s lawyers, while opposing the bail plea, pointed out that around five documents were forged, including the commencement certificate to show the BMC had given permissions for a seven-storey building.

Advocate Merchant said it was an attempt to violate civic rules “for construction of the building which, if it collapses, will cause casualty of human lives—as has happened in the collapse of Aftab Manzil”.

Justice A R Joshi agreed. “The present matter cannot be viewed as a simple breach of contract and cheating an individual and as such entitling the applicants to bail on their willingness to deposit an amount of Rs 50 lakh.”

Justice Joshi added that since the matter was still being investigated, it was not proper to release the accused on bail.