Friday, October 25, 2013

High Court Takes Cognizance;- SUPER AREA under scrutiny!!

 High Court

 In a builder dominated market where the home buyer has no real choice but to surrender all rights and follow each and every dictate of the Builder, the Bombay High Court has come to the rescue, by taking serious cognizance of a letter wherein the illegalities of builders selling flats on Super Area with a CD of the sting operation, has been converted to a Public Interest Litigation by the Hon'ble Court... Kindly go through the TOI story....kindly also go through for more information on what is SUPER AREA...

HC turns plaint on builders’ tricks into PIL

THANE: Taking serious cognisance of a letter alleging illegal activities by builders here, the Bombay high court has converted it into a public interest litigation. 

Activist Vikrant Karnik had in October 2012 written a detailed five-page letter to the high court Chief Justice based on a TV sting operation about certain builders allegedly flouting law during sale of flats. "I obtained the CD of the sting operation from the TV channel and forwarded it to the HCalong with my letter. I elaborated on the illegal acts of the builders, who sell flats on the basis of the super built-up area and demand upwards of Rs 5 lakh for a parking slot in the compound. All this is leading to corruption in public life and exploitation of the common man," said Karnik. 

The Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry strongly contested the charges. MCHI president Paras Gundecha told TOI that the majority of builders accept payment by cheque and do not indulge in cash dealings. "Though 20 years ago, there was a trend of certain developers accepting 40 per cent of flat cost in cash, that has reduced greatly. As the ready reckoner (RR) rates increase by 30 per cent every year, the majority of developers are collecting the flat cost by cheque as per the RR rates," said Gundecha. 

Karnik argued that builders' claims have been proved wrong by the sting operation that ostensibly shows some of them demanding higher cash component and illegally charging for parking facility. 

The activist said that in most cases homebuyers are asked to pay for an area that is over and above the flat's carpet area. "Builders have coined the word super built-up, which means that a flat of the size of, say, 100 sq ft carpet is superficially enlarged by 45% or more and the buyer is made to pay for 145 sq ft. This is not permissible, but builders still do it," Karnik claimed. 

He added that the area and the amount quoted in the purchase agreement signed between the buyer and the builder are often at variance. "The agreement document quotes an unbelievably low price and the buyer is made to pay the additional amount in cash. This is illegal," the activist said, citing the CD as proof of the goings-on in the realty sector. 

His plea seeking intervention by the HC to stop builders' malpractices has been admitted by the HC and the registrar (judicial-II) wrote to Karnik informing him that his letter has been converted into a PIL

Wednesday, October 23, 2013


There have been several request of Consumers of Era to know what they can legally do to safeguard their interest in case of cheque bouncing by Era.. there are several Home buyers who were promised return if Era failed to provide allotment but these consumers who have parted with a considerable amount towards Era, today face a peculiar problem of bounced cheques. So to help them understand and also to make other consumers aware; here is a extraordinary article, which I would like to share with you all.. kindly go through this:-

What if a cheque bounces? Here's a guide to the legal recourse available to you
Sakina Babwani, ET Bureau Jun 24, 2013, 10.24AM IST

Bounced cheques are one of the most common offencesplaguing the financial world. According to the Supreme Court, there are over 40 lakh such pending cases in the country. A cheque can be dishonoured for various reasons, the most common being insufficient funds in the account of the person drawing the cheque, and a mismatch of signatures with the bank records. But what do you do if you land a bad cheque? Here's a step-by-step guide to the legal recourse that is available to you.

Filing a criminal complaint
When a cheque bounces the first time, the bank issues a 'cheque return memo', stating the reasons for non-payment. The holder can resubmit the cheque to the bank within three months of the date on it, if he believes it will be honoured the second time.
The other option would be to prosecute the defaulter legally. The first step is to send a legal notice to the defaulter within 30 days of receiving the cheque return memo. All the relevant facts of the case, including the nature of transaction, amount, date of depositing the instrument in the bank, and subsequent date of dishonouring, should be clearly mentioned in the notice. If the cheque issuer fails to make a fresh payment within 30 days of receiving the notice, the payee has the right to file a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. However, the complaint should be registered in a magistrate's court within a month of the expiry of the notice period.
If you fail to file the complaint within this period, your suit will become time-barred and, hence, not be entertained by the court unless you show sufficient and reasonable cause for the delay. On receiving the complaint, along with an affidavit and relevant paper trail, the court will issue summons and hear the matter. If found guilty, the defaulter can be punished with a prison term of two years and/or a fine, which can be as high as twice the cheque amount.
However, the defaulter can appeal to the sessions court within one month of the date of judgement of the lower court. If a prolonged court battle is not acceptable to both the parties, an out-of-court settlement can be attempted at any point. "You can also file a case of cheating under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, but the above recourse is preferred as it is faster and specially dedicated to this particular offence (bounced cheques)," says Ravi Goenka, advocate, Goenka Law Associates.
Filing a civil suit
While the above-mentioned process is helpful in taking a defaulter to task, it may not always result in recovery of the pending dues. Hence, one can file a separate civil suit for recovery of the cheque amount, along with the cost borne and the lost interest.

This is where a summary suit under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure (1908) comes in. A summary suit is different from an ordinary suit as it does not give the accused the right to defend himself. Instead, the defendant has to procure permission from the court to do so. However, remember that summary suits can be availed of only in recovery matters, be it promissory notes, bills of exchange or cheques. "Since a summary suit is a civil proceeding that does not have the force of a criminal charge, the chances of imprisonment are remote in such matters," says Goenka.
These legal remedies are available only where pending debt or liability can be clearly established. Hence, if a bounced cheque was issued as a donation or as a gift, the holder cannot legally sue the defaulter.
Risk faced by defaulters
A jail term or heavy penalty isn't the only consequence faced by the issuer of a dishonoured cheque. The bank has the right to stop the chequebook facility and close the account for repeat offences of bounced cheques. However, the RBI clearly states that such action can be taken only if the default has taken place at least four times on cheques valued at over Rs 1 crore. Says Aakanksha Joshi, senior associate, Economic Laws Practice: "If the bounced cheque was for repayment of loans, banks also have the collateral offered as security. They are bound to issue a notice before they auction such property to recover the money." According to her, a bank can also deduct money from the defaulter's account if there is an explicit contract giving the bank such a right.
Changes in the pipeline
The option of dragging an offender to court under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act may not be available for long. If the amendment proposed by an interministerial group—set up last year to look into policy and legislative changes to tackle the large number of pending cases—are accepted, all cases of dishonoured cheques will have to be decided only through arbitration, conciliation or settlement by lok adalats. If the matter is referred to an arbitrator, the latter will hear both the parties and pass an award binding on both. This can only be appealed on grounds that it is invalid or the defendant was not given adequate time to present the case, or was not given notice about the arbitrator's appointment.

If the matter is referred for conciliation, a third person has to help the parties come to a settlement. Lok adalats function on similar lines. In both these cases, if the disputing parties are unable to settle, the matter can be taken to court again. Banks, however, are not happy with these developments. "This is a backward step in terms of recovery mechanism," says Meenakshi A, head, operations, ING Vysya Bank.

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

ERA INFRA Change of Address

This is to Inform all that the parent company of Era Landmarks (I) Ltd, has intimated the BSE its change of Address; kindly go through attached link.

Era Infra Engineering Ltd has informed BSE that the Company has shifted its operations from office situated at 153, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase - III, New Delhi - 110020 to the Company's new office situated at:B- 24, Sector - 3,Noida (U.P.) - 201301,Tel No. 0120-4037000,Fax No. is 0120-4037029.Source : BSERead more at:

Take care!!

Friday, October 11, 2013

NDTV Profit Continues to highlight the misuse of EDC collected in Haryana

NDTV Profit, Once again highlights the misuse of EDC money being charged and collected in the state of Haryana. During this show you would find out that Greater Faridabad's misery is not any less then that of Gurgaon or any other district in Haryana. While the Govt. is sitting on huge funds at its disposal, it is willfully not working towards development of the state and utilizing the huge corpus in as mush as the same manner as the builders have been doing in the state. In short, There is NO ACCOUNTABILITY.

The Builders are not accountable to the Competent Authority ( DG,TCP) as the Builder lobby gets all sanctions granted in their favor from Mr. Hooda (The CM OF HARYANA), who keeps dolling out relief policy after another to the builders, so that they enjoy the EDC money collected from us, for personal use. Its indeed surprising that license granted in 2006 or 2007 has been provided relief policy to defer EDC payments from 2010 and again in 2012 and now in 2013, every time there is an extension sought by the builders and every time the big hearted CM obliges them.  The mal- administration and oppressiveness of this administration, peaks when these public servants enhance the EDC from retrospective effect, effectively making the common man of the State, pay for the misdeeds of these builders and their own deficiencies of not developing the area as envisaged in the  master plan of 1991.

If in 2013, we still have to fight for common and essential services like Water, Electrification and Sewerage then what is the use of a Government and so many public servants. What have they been doing with our money, is this negligence or incompetence. Finally, do we deserve such administration and Governance, has the time not come to say, we have had enough of your loot and bring in only people who have the competence and the vision to work for the citizens of the State.  JAI HIND!!

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

PARKING space denied by Builder; Penalized by DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM.

Here is an article in TOI on 8th Sept' 2013, which narrates the Order of the  District Consumer Court (Mumbai Suburban) where in the Consumer who did not get parking from his builder was compensated with Rs. 5 Lakhs and Rs. 25,000 as legal expenses.... Please go through this and at the end find the link to the judgement....

MUMBAI: A builder has been ordered to pay a Khar-based man Rs 5.25 lakh compensation for not providing parking space with a flat purchased in 2007.The forum observed that irrespective of an agreement between the builder and the flat buyer, it was mandatory for the builder to provide parking space. "A building's parking space is part of the common area. Hence, a developer can neither sell it nor dispose it off in any other manner ," the forum said while holding Pediyar Associates guilty of deficiency in service. 

According the complaint filed by Kanyo Merani, he had purchased the 963 sq ft flat from Pediyar Associates for Rs 52 lakh. The agreement said that Merani would be given stilt parking along with the flat. When he received possession of the flat, Merani was not given the parking space. The builder then agreed to give him a car parking space in another wing of the society, where Merani began to park his vehicle. However, the space was then sold to another flat owner in the building who occupied it in January 2010. Merani got no relief from the society or the builder following which he filed a complaint in the Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum on August 16, 2010. He sought re-allotment of the parking space. 

In its reply, the construction firm denied that the agreement mentioned a parking space to Merani. They also alleged that the parking space clause was added later in the agreement by Merani. 

The forum took into consideration the documents and the police complaint registered by Merani after he was asked to vacate the parking space in 2010. The forum said that this showed that according to the agreement he was allotted the space. However, he was forcibly made to vacate that space after the builder and the other flat owner joined hands, the forum added. 

The forum said that Merani should have been provided with the space. The forum further pointed out that the builder had to provide enough parking spaces while taking into consideration the number of flats in the building. It, however , agreed that the current holder of the parking space could not be directed to vacate the space as he too has a right over it as a flat owner. The forum held that the builder should compensate Merani. 

The Judgement is in Marathi..

Three things are absolutely clear from this, that parking is a part of the common area.  Second, it should not be charged and lastly that it is mandatory for the builder to provide one parking space per dwelling unit. Earlier we did not know and maybe paid what the builder demanded but now what is stopping us to protect our interest and rights.. Let no one fool us.. lets be aware and get together on one platform to defeat the malafide intent of the unscrupulous developer whose only aim seems to be to gain at our expense.. lets unite and get our money back.. Takecare!!

Tuesday, October 1, 2013



Why we pay EDC and where the money goes..why we still do not get development though we have paid our fair share of EDC.. OOPs not just fair share but an 0ver charged figure..The EDC scam.. could be worth..thousands of crores of Indian Rupees. PLEASE GO THROUGH THE NDTV COVERAGE ON EDC, to understand what we stand to loose by believing, the demand letters send by Colonizers to collect EDC ... is it mal-administration and arbitrary charge..which has no legal justification.. let us discover...

please click on this link below. understand..... please watch...

Take care & best wishes!!