Questions and Queries related to Akrama Sakrama


1). What is FAR?

2). What is Setback?

3). What is height restriction?

4). What is Zonal Regulation?

5). What are the eligibility conditions of the property to apply for the regularisation?

6). How much is the scrutiny fee?

7). How much is the regularisation fee?

8). When the scrutiny fee and the regularisation fee has to be paid?

9). Who can apply for the regularisation?

10). What are the documents that are required to be submitted for the regularisation?

11). What type of properties are eligible for regularisation?

12). Will there be a check on the documents submitted?

13). Where shall I submit the application?

14). Where can I get the application?

15). Can I submit the application online?

16). What will happen, if the violation and deviation is not regularised?

17). How to reduce the deviation or violation to bring to the parameters set by the Government?

18). Who has to pay the regularisation fee? ( in case of apartments-unauthorised floor)

All the queries and questions will be answered soon through a booklet and will be widely published by the Government/BBMP soon.

For.Further Details contact the BBMP after the notification is issued.

 

CONFIDENCE LOST !!! YES


THE LAND ENCROACHMENT BY LAND SHARKS AND ROGUE DEVELOPERS HAS BEEN DETECTED AND HUGE SECTORS OF LAND REPOSSESSED OR TAKEN OVER BY THE GOVERNMENT AND THE CONFIDENCE GROUP, WHICH WAS EARLIER SUSPECTED TO BE ONE OF THE ENCROACHER HAS TURNED OUT TO BE TRUE.

AS USUAL, THE DC ISSUED THE NOTICE OF EVICTION, AND AS USUAL, THE DEVELOPER GOT THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE DC AND THE DC OBTAINED AN INTERIM STAY AND THIS WILL GO ON AND ON AND ON.  THE AFFECTED PURCHASERS WILL HAVE TO LISTEN TO THE MARKETING TALK OF THE `MBA` LITERATES AND THEIR MONEY IS LOST OR GONE !!

BY THE END OF THIS WEEK, IT IS LEARNT FROM THE RELIABLE SOURCES THAT OVER FEW HUNDRED SITES FORMED OR DEVELOPED IN GOVERNMENT LAND HAD BEEN REPOSSESSED BY THE GOVERNMENT.  MAJORITY OF THE PURCHASERS ARE NOT EVEN AWARE THAT THEIR SITES (ILLEGALLY BOUGHT) HAS BEEN LOST.  

SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS ARE:

WE HAVE A KATHA,(WHOSE PROPERTY?)

WE HAVE PAID TAXES ( PAYMENT OF TAXES DOES NOT CONFER ANY RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST)

WE HAVE POWER CONNECTION ( POWER SUPPLIER IS A COMPANY AND SUPPLIES POWER ON A CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT AND THE POWER SUPPLY COMPANY CANNOT GRANT OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY)

WE HAVE ROADS AND STREET LIGHTS (OUT OF COURTESY OR BY MISREPRESENTATION OF FACTS- ROADS ARE LAID)

THAT MLA, MP AND MINISTER PROMISE OR OPENED THE LAYOUT, HENCE IT IS LEGAL!!! JOKE OF THIS CENTURY!!!!!

NONE OF THESE ARGUMENTS WILL HOLD GOOD IN THE COURT OF LAW. 

A LOOOSING BATTLE WHICH WILL PINCH THE PURSE AND HEALTH OF THE PERSON IS THE NET RESULT OF BUYING PROPERTIES WITHOUT DILIGENT ENQUIRY.  EVEN THE ENQUIRY MUST BE CONDUCTED THOROUGHLY WITH AN EXPERT PROFESSIONAL AND NOT WITH ANY TOM, DICK AND HARRY.

SUPRME COURT OF INDIA HAS SUPRME POWERS TO DEAL WITH ILLEGALITY- THE BENCH


SUPREME COURT OF INDIA GOES SUPREME – 

THE BENCH WHILE DISPOSING OFF A SUIT SAID THAT The limits of power exercised by the Supreme Court when it chases injustice are the sky itself, when the ordinary law does not meet the demand of justic

“It is plenary power (SUPER POWER) exercisable outside the purview of ordinary law to meet the demand of justice. Article 136 of the Constitution is a special jurisdiction. It is residuary power. It is extraordinary in its amplitude. The limits ofSupreme Court when it chases injustice are the sky itself,” said the Bench of Justice J. M. Panchal and Justice H. L. Gokhale.

The court further stated:

“The appellate power vested in the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution is not to be confused with the ordinary appellate power exercised by appellate Courts and appellate Tribunals under specific statutes. The powers under Article 136 can be exercised by the Supreme Court in favour of a party evensuo motu when the Court is satisfied that compelling grounds for its exercise exist,” it said.

Justice Panchal said: “Where there is manifest injustice, a duty is enjoined upon this Court to exercise its suo motu power by setting right the illegality in the judgment of the High Court as it is well-settled that illegality should not be allowed to be perpetuated and failure by this Court to interfere with the same would amount to allow illegality to be perpetuated.”

Rejecting the contention that the Supreme Court should not do anything which was not prayed for or challenged, the Bench said: “When an apparent irregularity is found by this Court in an order passed by the High Court, the Supreme Court cannot ignore substantive rights of a litigant while dealing with the cause pending before it. There is no reason why the relief cannot be and should not be appropriately moulded while disposing of an appeal arising by grant of special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution.”

The Bench was of the view that the power under Article 136 “is meant to supplement the existing legal framework. It is conceived to meet situations which cannot be effectively and appropriately tackled by the existing provisions of law.”

The case

In the instant case, the appellant, A. Subash Babu, a police officer in Andhra Pradesh, was alleged to have entered into a second marriage by suppressing the fact of his first marriage which was in subsistence. Aggrieved, the second wife filed a complaint for offences of bigamy, suppression, cheating, dowry and cruelty. The Andhra Pradesh High Court quashed the charges of dowry and cruelty, holding that the second marriage was void but allowed other charges to remain. The present appeal was directed against this judgment.

Dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court held that the woman with whom the second marriage was contracted by suppressing the fact of former marriage would be entitled to maintain complaint against her husband under Sections 494 and 495 of the Indian Penal Code. Further without any appeal against quashing of charges under Section 498 A, the Bench said it could order reopening it to render justice.