DSP Associates Advocates

07/09/2017

1st Order passed by Maha RERA against Ekta World
1st Order passed by Maha RERA against Ekta World
6th September 2017, Maha RERA Passes order against Ekta World, 1st Order passed by MAHARASHTRA RERA against unscrupulous Builder : Ekta World Pvt Ltd promoted by Mr Ashok Mohanani and Vivek Mohanani..

The Complainant Mr. Kamlesh Ailani filed the complaint U/S 18 of Maha RERA "section 18 is given below for your reference" and got the quickest order with in 36 days of RERA coming into force from 1st August 2017.

The copy of order is attached herewith

Under / Section 18 - (a) If you (builder) are unable to give possession in time (as per the registered agreement) for any reason, then the allottee may withdraw from the project, and the entire amount paid by him should be returned with 10 percent interest.
(b) However, even if the allottee wishes to continue with the delayed project, and does not want his money back, 10 percent per annum must be paid to the allottee for every month of delay until the date that flat possession is given (with occupation certificate).
(c) If allottees suffer any loss due to defects in the property title, they must be given compensation whenever such loss happens, in perpetuity. The statute of limitations does not apply.
(d) If you (the builder) fail to discharge any obligations under the RERA Act, Rules and Regulations, and also the terms and conditions of the Sale Agreement, you will have to compensate the Allottees.
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) on Wednesday asked a builder in Mumbai to return an advance amount of Rs 26.15 lakh to a consumer -the first such order since the real estate law came into effect in the state on May 1.
The deadline for registering all ongoing projects in the state with MahaRERA ended on July 31. Since then, the authority has registered over 13,000 projects -the highest in the country .
The authority has so far received more than 98 complaints. On Wednesday , it issued its first order in a case registered by the consumer from Khar against the developer for the project in Virar (West).
The complainant, a consultant who agreed to speak to TOI on condition of anonymity , said he had registered the complaint under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act to get his advance amount back because he was facing difficulty in cancelling the project.
MahaRera authorities said the complainant had booked the flat in 2012-13 and was assured by the developer that the project would be completed in 2016.
The case was filed as the complainant wanted to cancel the project and the builder to reimburse the signing amount as the building was not completed, the authoriti es added. The complainant approached RERA authorities and the order was issued in his favour, an official said. The consultant told TOI said that he was happy with the RERA authorities for resolving the case fast. “We are extremely happy that MahaRERA ruled in our favour and the developer immediately issued the cheque follo wing the order,“ said the complainant, who was present at the MahaRERA office with his spouse. The consul tant had filed the complaint on the MahaRERA website by paying Rs 5,000.
RERA authorities said the builder agreed to pay the money to the complainant after three hearings by the MahaRERA authorities. “Consent terms were filed by both the parties and the developer agreed to return the amount.Accordingly , the complainant got the cheque. The complaint was heard before adjudicating officer B D Kapadanis,“ MahaRERA secretary Vasant Prabhu told TOI.
He added that this was first decision taken after MahaRERA was constituted and the maiden order was a proconsumer one. The order issued by MahaRERA stated that the parties have amicab ly settled the dispute and filed their consent terms.
Mumbai Grahak Panchayat (MGP) chairperson Shirish Deshpande said they were expecting more consumers to register their grievances against developers registered with MahaRERA.“We have to wait and watch,“ he added.
Credai-Maharashta president Shantilal Kataria said the builders' response to get registered with MahaRERA was encouraging. “At least 17 lakh residential units, over 1 lakh commercial units and above 2 lakh plots have been registered with MahaRERA.This is among the highest in India. We expect more developers to register soon,“ he said.

06/09/2017

Law Ministry directs Trial Courts to decide all cases which are 5 Year old or more by December 2018

By December 2018, Indian judiciary burdened with pendency of more than 3,20,00,000 cases, will see a quite significant change in its justice delivery system.

Ray of hope has come from the Ministry of Law & Justice; which has directed the Trial Courts to give dates of final judgement in every case they’re hearing.

Especially cases pending for 5 to 10 years have been given dates of December 2018 for final order.

The ministry is also working on a new mechanism, under which an automatic judgement date would be handed as soon as a case is filed.

This’ll instantly help parties know when the 1st round of litigation’ll get over. In a meeting held last week between the law ministry & Niti Aayog, stress has been laid on fixing the time limit of cases, especially criminal & civil ones.

“1 round of litigation in the trial courts would be 2-3 years while in civil cases it’d be 7-8 years,” a senior law ministry official told.

The ministry is also studying the reasons for delay in cases – ranging from no. of adjournments, stay taken from HC on a trial court order, no. of appeals filed, avg. time spent on disposal of cases to classification of cases.

“…trial court proceedings depend largely on various other factors; if an order is passed from a trial court & a stay from HC is taken, then trial court process’ll come to a halt. So, we’re figuring out the ways to overcome these problems,” the senior official added.Pendency at a glance

Delhi’s 6 Trial Courts have acted very swiftly on these directions & have already started giving final date of judgement in cases which are 5-10 years old.

With the new system in place, it would be difficult for the parties to get unnecessary adjournments. Moreover, there’d be more responsibility on prosecuting agencies to produce evidences & witnesses on time so that proceedings don’t get hampered & stick to its respective deadlines.

Source New Indian Express

Related News @ Latest Laws-

16.8.2017- With SC still having a 32 yr+ & HCs 61 yr+ Cases, District Courts asked to decide all 10 yr+ Cases

6.8.2017 – High Court says ‘Sorry’ to Woman for 24 years delay dispensation of Justice

Law Commission Report No. 79- Delay and Arrears in High Courts and other Appellate Courts

Law Commission Report No. 77- Delay and Arrears in Trial Courts

22.6.2016 – Stay Orders passed by High Courts and SC are delaying timely delivery Justice in District Courts

03/09/2017

Do you think Benazir Bhutto is Murdered again after 10 years as Five Taliban Terrorists are acquitted

Former Military Dictator and President Pervez Musharraf is declared an absconder by the Court.

Benazir Bhutto was Murdered

It took almost ten years for the Pakistani Anti-Terror Court to announce its verdict in Benazir Bhutto murder case.

Muhammad Asghar Khan, Rawalpindi Judge has acquitted the five accused who are Taliban terrorists, awarded 17-years imprisonment each to the two senior police officials for abetting crime and has declared the Former Military Dictator Pervez Musharraf as a absconder.

There is a sense of deep disappointment among people after the controversial verdict. People believe that Benazir Bhutto has been murdered again.

It was expected that Court would not be able to convict P. Musharraf in the absentia and five main accused released.



Benazir did her homework. She wrote to her trusted friend in US, Mark Siegel, and told him that Gen. Pervez Musharraf would be her assassin. Mark Siegel was told to share letter with BBC or CNN in case of another attack on her life.

Musharraf’s Government had nominated Taliban terrorist Baitullah Mehsud as mastermind behind her assassination, but he denied it.

Musharraf sent a message to Benazir Bhutto through the Senator from South Waziristan that he was not planning any attack on her life.

The Musharraf Govt. claimed to arrest some boys who facilitated su***de bomber on December 27th in Rawalpindi but in reality these boys were already in the custody of the security agencies before attack on Benazir Bhutto.

Crime Scene was washed immediately after attack on the orders of the two police officials. These officials got orders from a close subordinate of Parvez Musharraf. They never disclosed his name and faced the harsh imprisonment in the end.



Mr. Musharraf was allowed to leave Pakistan again in the year 2016 by Nawaz Sharif Government and PPP leaders remained silent. Anti-Terror Court summoned Musharraf many times to appear but he never appeared. After more than 300 hearings in the period of 10 years Anti Terrorist court released the five suspects who were arrested by the Musharraf Government.

During the period of trial, Four Governments and 8 judges have been changed in 10 years, but truth is that main accused, Musharraf, was only declared as the absconder because in the Pakistani law courts cannot convict someone in who is in absentia.

Today, the PPP leaders are criticizing court verdict but it’s no more a secret that PPP never tried to prosecute Parvez Musharraf because it was more interested in completing its five-year term in power, by pleasing powerful establishment which never wanted Mr. Musharraf’s prosecution.

Parvez Musharraf is an assassin. He was not declared assassin by the Court of Law but Benazir Bhutto named him as her assassin. History will remember him as the killer of Benazir Bhutto and the Democracy.

01/09/2017

Mumbai Floods: PIL Filed In Bombay HC Seeking FIR Against Municipal Commissioner, Other Officials For Causing Doctor’s Death [Read Petition].
http://www.livelaw.in/mumbai-floods-pil-filed-bombay-hc-seeking-fir-municipal-commissioner-officials-causing-doctors-death-read-petition/

A public interest litigation filed by the Retail Traders Welfare Association has sought criminal prosecution against officials of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai for causing the death of Dr. Deepak Amrapurkar due to their negligence. Dr.Amrapurkar was a 58-year-old gastroenterologist wor...

31/08/2017

SC: Medical officer - Not ballistic expert.

The medical officer is not ballistic expert. He is not expected to answer as to whether a certain injury could have been caused by bullet alone. His opinion to that extent is of no consequence.

Case:
Mahmood Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Citation:
AIR 2008 SC 515: (2007) 12 SCC 515.

31/08/2017

Supreme Court asks Dilip Kumar to pay Rs. 20 Crore in Realty Case - restores possession of property to him.
https://www.thequint.com/entertainment/celebrities/supreme-court-restores-possession-of-bandra-property-dilip-kumar

The veteran actor was fighting for the possession of his Bandra property.