Of late the cases of buyers of apartments getting into trouble due to the lapses of the builders with regard to building plan violations, nonpayment of statutory charges the authorities is on the rise in the city.
In a latest case in the Peenya Industrial Area of the city a leading developer has constructed thousands of apartments and sold to the buyers. But, to their surprise and shock more than 900 apartment owners are in trouble as the BBMP has refused to give them khatas, stating that the developer has not paid the betterment charges to the tune of Rs.4.26Crores to BBMP.The pertains to the year 2008 when the BBMP had decided on the charges with the developer and had registered the Khatas.But, the developer failed to pay the charges decided by the BBMP.The civic authorities further say that – inspite of issuing notice in December 2012,the developer has not paid the betterment charges of Rs.4.26Crores to the BBMP.
The case of the developer is taken up by the Confederation of Real Estate Developer’s Asssociation of India (CREDAI) and have taken the matter to the Karnataka High Court – contending that at the time construction the area was under BDA and the developer had paid some development charges to the BDA. The CREDAI says the problem is not that of one developer and several others are also in similar postion because of change of jurisdiction from BDA to BBMP.
The CREDAI is of the view that in case the Court verdict goes against the developers, then the buyers have to pay the betterment charges as per the clause in the Sale agreement. The buyers of houses/apartments who are in who are in quandary, say at the handing over of the property in 2010-11 the jurisdiction was that of BBMP and hence the developer has to pay the betterment charges.
Builder Firm Staffer booked in Rs.16Crore Cheating Case
Rs.16 Crore Cheating by Builder Firm Staffer
A case has been booked against Mumbai based construction company staffer for allegedly cheating a Kolkata based construction company.The Kolkata firm general manager offered to buy and develop two SRA plots in Mumbai through the construction company of Mumbai on
a Joint Venture basis.It was agreed by the firms to that the Mumbai firm would get 35% of profits while the Kolkata firm would take 65% of profit.The Mumbai company staffer allegedly collected Rs.16Crores through forged documents of properties from the general manager of Kolkata compay.When the Mumbai firm stopped responding to their phone calls the Kolkata company suspected foul play and have approached the police.
Who can present the document for registration ?
Section 32 of the Registration Act, 1908 deals with the provisions relating to the presenting of
documents for registration by a person. Subject to certain exceptions, every document which
is to be registered under the provisions of the Act should be presented at the proper registration
office by (a) the concerned person himself/herself, or (b) the representative or the agent of
such a person duly authorised in manner as stated in Section 33 of the Registration Act, 1908.
What should be the language of the document ?
The language of a document presented for registration should the one commonly used in that
District. Under Section 19 of the Act, the Registering Officer is empowered to refuse to register
a document if it is presented for registration in a language which is not commonly used in the
district unless the document is accompanied by a true translation into a language commonly
used in the district and also by a true copy.
How does one obtain certified copies of the registered documents ?
Any member of the public may obtain the certified copies of the registered documents of
immovable property from the respective Sub-Registrar offices on application and payment
of prescribed fees. A Stamp paper is required to be produced along with the application and
the prescribed copying fee is to be paid.