The limitation period for an Original Application (OA) filed by a bank against a defaulting borrower is 3 years from the date of default. This means that the bank must file the OA within 3 years of the date on which the borrower first defaults on their loan payments.
The limitation period is set out in Article 113 of the Limitation Act, 1963. This article applies to suits for "money lent or advanced on a contract expressed or implied, where the money is recoverable by action."
There are a few exceptions to the 3-year limitation period. For example, if the borrower acknowledges the debt in writing, the limitation period will start from the date of the acknowledgement.
If the bank fails to file the OA within the 3-year limitation period, the borrower may be able to argue that the bank's claim is time-barred. This means that the court may dismiss the bank's case.
The govt. settled the erstwhile east-pakistan refugees as farmers and allotted them with agriculture land and homestead land free of cost. But this allotment was made only to the refugees who were married/ had a family. Bachelor refugees accompanying their elder married brothers, were not considered for allotment of land during that time. Later on these bachelor, irrespective of their marital status, were allotted agricultural land, but with lesser quantum of area. My question is, Is this allotment of land to the married refugee a self acquired property or ancestral property.
Asked from: Punjab
If the land becomes free hold, then it is a self-acquired property of the person to whom it was allotted by the government. The land allotted to refugees is generally considered their self-acquired property. When refugees are provided with land, it is typically done through government schemes or initiatives aimed at rehabilitation and resettlement.
Once the land is allotted to them, it is intended to be their own property, and they have the right to use and manage it as per applicable laws and regulations.
However, it's important to note that specific laws and policies related to land allocation to refugees may vary depending on the state or region in India.
It is advisable to consult with local authorities or legal professionals who can provide accurate and updated information regarding the rights and status of refugees in Andaman & Nicobar.
Related:
Greetings sir/mam, Recently my parents expired and then me and my sister decided to come with my uncle but now he is creating problems for us by listening to or cdr and finding our location every single time we are not comfortable in this and no one will be please help how i can stop this.
Asked from: Manipur
Start by having an open and honest conversation with your uncle. Express your concerns and let him know how his actions are making you and your sister uncomfortable. Try to understand his perspective and see if there is a way to address the issues amicably.
Reach out to other relatives who may be able to mediate or help resolve the situation. They might be able to speak to your uncle and encourage him to respect your privacy and provide a more supportive environment for you and your sister.
If the issues persist and you feel unsafe or threatened, it may be necessary to take legal recourse. If your uncle has any criminal intention then he has committed an offence of stalking. You may file a complaint/FIR against him.
Remember, it's crucial to document any incidents or evidence of harassment or threats for future reference. Your safety and well-being are of utmost importance, so don't hesitate to reach out to professionals and authorities who can assist you in resolving this situation.
Also read: To some extent personal information can be revealed under RTI Act
Hi, I reside in Ahmedabad. My society is a cooperative housing service society. I want to know if the builder provided extra space to house owners for specific use, not for construction. Builder constructed a building over the area reserved for the use of the house owners. If house owners construct these areas, do these spaces belong to the society for common utilities such as drainage, common plumbing, gas line conduct area, and parking? The builder has already constructed such areas, and I wish to file a complaint against them. They are not allowing the construction of a gas pipeline supply due to their previous construction. What steps should I take to proceed?
Asked from: Gujarat
That construction is illegal because it was not sanctioned by the appropriate authority. The approved plan specifically mentioned areas for the common use of flat owners. There is a fixed ratio between the construction area and open area.
When the builder did construction on the open area which was left for the common use for the flat owner, he breaches the ratio or proportion of open and built up area. This is indeed an illegal act, you should file a complaint before the appropriate authority who has sanctioned the site plan.
This construction is being done in violation of the approved site plan therefore, it is illegal per se. That construction should be demolished.
Read also: Legal action against builder for not providing parking spot
1997 से लगातार न्यूनतम वेतनमान दिया जा रहा है। बिना किसी ठोस कारण के मेरे डी ए तथा अन्य तमाम लाभों को अवरूद्ध किया गया है। बहाना सर्विस बुक और पर्सनल फाइल का नहीं होना है।
प्रश्न पूछा गया: बिहार से
यदि लगातार २५ वर्षों से सेवा अविवादित है और न्यूनतम वेतन दिए जाने का प्रमाण है तो सर्विस बुक न होने के आधार पर अन्य सेवा लाभों से वंचित नहीं किया जा सकता है।
नियोक्ता का दायित्व होता है कि वह अपने कर्मचारी के सर्विस बुक एवं पर्सनल फाइल को रखे और उसे अद्यतन करे। मात्र सर्विस बुक और पर्सनल फाइल के न होने पर कर्मचारी को उसके विधिक अधिकार से वंचित नहीं किया जा सकता है।
यदि आपकी नियुक्ति विधिक प्रक्रिया के तहत और सिविल पोस्ट पर हुई है तो पूरा वेतन एवं अन्य सेवा लाभों को अर्जित करना आपका विधिक और मौलिक अधिकार है। संविधान के अनुच्छेद २१ के अंतर्गत किसी नागरिक को उसके प्राण (life) एवं दैहिक स्वतंत्रता से बिना किसी विधिक प्रक्रिया के वंचित नहीं किया जा सकता है।
अनुच्छेद २१ के अंतर्गत "सम्मान के साथ जीने का अधिकार" एक मूल अधिकार है। कर्मचारी को पूर्ण वेतन न देना उसको गरिमा या सम्मान के साथ जीने से वंचित करना है। यदि बिना किसी विधिक कारण के पूर्ण वेतन नहीं दिया जाता है तो कर्मचारी के मूल अधिकार का उल्लंघन होता है अतः आप अनुच्छेद २२६ के अंतर्गत माननीय उच्च न्यायालय में एक रिट याचिका योजित कर सकते हैं।
अतः आप अनुच्छेद २२६ के अंतर्गत माननीय उच्च न्यायालय में एक रिट याचिका योजित करें और पूर्ण वेतन दिए जाने की मांग करें। यदि २५ वर्षों तक सेवा का रिकॉर्ड है और वर्तमान पद पर विधिवत नियुक्ति हुई है तो आप पूरा वेतन और अन्य सेवा लाभ जैसे- पदोन्नति, पेंशन, वित्तीय स्तरोन्नयन (ACP), चिकित्सा लाभ आदि पाने के अधिकारी हैं।
सर्विस बुक और पर्सनल फाइल रखना नियोक्ता की जिम्मेदारी होती है। नियोक्ता अपने किसी त्रुटि के लिए आपको विधिक अधिकार से वंचित नहीं कर सकता है।
According to section 10A of the Divorce Act 1869, divorce by mutual consent is not permitted within two years of separation. A petition for dissolution of marriage may be presented to the District Court by both the parties to a marriage together, on the ground that:
- they have been living separately for a period of two years or more,
- they have not been able to live together and
- they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved
A period of separation for two years is mandatory for the mutual consent divorce. Hence, you cannot file a mutual divorce case within one year of marriage. If there is exceptional hardship to retain the marital status or due to incompatibility of spouses, it is impossible for them to live together then you can get mutual divorce.
In this situation, you have to move a petition to the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant a divorce on the exceptional ground i.e. the marriage is irretrievable.
In Shilpa Shailesh vs Varun Srinivasan 2023 the Supreme Court has held that if the marriage is irretrievably break down no possibility of reconciliation the Court has power under Article 142 to dissolve the marriage to do complete justice.
It is not possible to dissolve the marriage through a notorised agreement because a decree of competent court is mandatory for the dissolution of marriage. That agreement or out of the court divorce has no legal sanctity. It shall not dissolve your marital status.
Differential parking fee from members and owners of flats. I live in a society where the monthly cost for parking a car is different for different flat owners. The distinction in parking fee is made on the basis of 'whether the owner had purchased the parking spot from the builder'. A bunch of people living in the building bought flats directly from the builder and also purchased a parking spot. Now, when we bought the house a few years back, the previous owner didn't have a parking spot. Therefore, they are charging a premium parking rate which is 2500 per month as opposed to the others which are less than 150 per month. Interestingly there is no stilt/covered/enclosed parking spot and all are in the 'common area' itself. Can the society through their AGM/GM take such decisions and deploy differential pricing? If not, what precedence/by-law can be used to argue this point.
Asked from: Maharashtra
According to Section 3 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the promotion of construction, sale, management, and transfer) Act, 1963, when a person purchases a flat, he also pays for the common area and facilities in proportion to the carpet area of his flat.
Therefore, it is incorrect to state that the housing society is the sole owner of the common area. Instead, all flat owners have joint ownership over the common area. The society assumes the responsibility of maintaining the common area in accordance with the society's bylaws for the welfare of its members.
In Nahalchand Laloochand (P) Ltd. v. Panchali Coop. Housing Society Ltd., (2010) 9 SCC 536 the supreme court has held that "in our discussion above that open to the sky parking area or stilted portion usable as parking space is not a “garage” within the meaning of Section 2(a-1) of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act and, therefore, not sellable independently as a flat or along with a flat."
Hence, it was impossible for the builder/promoter to sell open to the sky area as a parking spot. That kind of sale is illegal because it is violating the provisions of Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act.
Your society does not have a covered/stilted/enclosed parking area. The society provides facilities to flat owners, who do not have exclusive parking spots, to park their vehicles in the common area.
However, it is important to note that designating this facility as 'premium parking' is not legally permissible. The mentioned practice of charging for the facility as 'premium parking' is deemed illegal. According to the judgment in the case of Nahalchand Laloochand (P) Ltd. v. Panchali Coop. Housing Society Ltd., (2010) 9 SCC 536, the society has the sole right to charge the maintenance cost for the common area in proportion to the carpet area of each flat purchased by the owners.
Therefore, the society should not engage in the practice of charging extra fees for parking in the common area by labelling it as 'premium parking' as it contradicts the legal provisions established in the mentioned court case.
Parking fee
The society's bylaws should outline a transparent methodology for determining the fee for open parking. This methodology may consider factors such as the size of the parking space, maintenance costs, administrative expenses, and other relevant factors.
Typically, the fee is collected on a monthly or annual basis and is included as part of the overall maintenance charges imposed by the society. It is crucial for the society to have a fair and transparent system for determining and collecting the fee for open parking.
The details regarding the fee structure and collection should be clearly specified in the society's bylaws, and any changes to the fee should be approved as per the procedures outlined in the bylaws.
The exorbitantly high fees for premium parking in your society, which seem to be an act of extortion, raise concerns. It is essential to ensure that the fees charged are reasonable, justifiable, and free from any discriminatory practices.
Moreover, it is important to note that the builder does not have the right to sell common areas of the society as parking spots. Therefore, any differentiation between purchased/owned parking spots and other parking spots without a legal basis is considered illegal.
The concept of premium parking is invalid as the builder had no authority to sell open areas as parking spaces. In the prevailing scenario, the parking fee should be the same for all flat owners. The existing classification between owned and unowned parking spots lacks a legal basis and is therefore illegal.
In light of these circumstances, it is recommended that you lodge a complaint with the appropriate authority, such as the society's registrar, against the illegal fee collection practices carried out by the housing society. These practices are in contravention of the society's bylaws and require proper investigation and action.
Related:
