I came across your profile on https://www.indiancooperative.com/ I felt I could use your help with this scenario here.
I have a flat in Pristine Prolife Pune. I do not live in Pune and have let my flat to bachelors. There are almost 50+ like me who also have let their flats.
The MC (Managing Committee) has passed a resolution on prohibiting letting flats to bachelors due to the nuisance caused. This goes against people like me who have invested a lot of money and are looking at not getting enough returns on it.
I would like to understand
1.If the resolution made by the society is valid and legal ( under what circumstances)
2.Can this resolution be challenged by members like me ?
If yes what are the various means that we can challenge this?
Other members like me are willing to work with the society and do whatever is necessary to ensure peace prevails. However MC members do not seem to be amiable and are eschewing discussions and interactions.
None of the non resident members were aware of this resolution being passed , none of us got a chance to challenge this or discuss this before or present our views. This defeats the very purpose of being in a co-operative society
Can you please us help with your expertise and experiences
I C Naik
I guess your CHS Bye-Laws are unchanged since the society was registered presumably registering the Model Bye-Laws of 2001 or 2009.The latest Model 20 14 has also not been adopted by your CHS. It is advisable to keep a certified copy of registered bye-laws of your CHS handy. Secretary is duty bound to supply it on your request, which costs about Rs100/-
The concept of a dwelling place as a part of community living emerged as a solution to acute paucity of land in Metros. One of the preconditions for a person to be admitted to the membership of a CHS was that “he has furnished an undertaking in the prescribed form about disposal of the house, the plot or the flat, already owned by him or any of the members of his family in the area of operation of the society” [ Bye-Law No 19(vi) and undertaking in the form prescribed at Appendix 5 : Model Bye-Laws 1984].
Yet another restrictive condition to acquire an additional flat in the family was prescribed under Bye-Law No 63 [Model Bye-Laws 1984] : (a) No individual member of the society shall be eligible to hold more than one flat, in the area of operation of the society in his name or in the name of any of the members of his family without the previous consent in writing of the Committee of the society. (b) The member, who desires to hold additional flat, in the area of operation of the society, in his name or in the name of any of the members of his family, shall make an application to the Secretary of the society in the prescribed form, giving full justification for holding the additional flat. The form to make this application is prescribed at Appendix 29. There are two clauses in this form which are worth noting:
3.As the numbers in the family is large* the number of persons dependent on me and required to stay with me is large* my business activities are such as need special arrangement to accommodate visitors, coming to me for business* (state here any other convincing reason) the additional ia absolutely necessary .
4.It is herby declared that both the flats will be used for my *our bonafide residential purpose and would not be sub-let or given on leave and license or care taker basis or possession thereof would not be parted with in any other manner , without the previous permissions of the Committee of the Society.
The number of housing societies have increased manifold and it has now become a fully blown up real estate, making an affordable house for middle class a dream never to be realized. The Bye-Laws are to be drafted by the prospective residents of a proposed CHS to suit their group requirements, taste, lifestyle as a homogeneous group. But it never remained practical over a period and even forgotten. The Cooperative Commissioner’s office periodically recommends a new Model Bye-Laws [ there are Models of 2001, 2009 1nd 2014]. New housing societies are directly indirectly forced to register the latest Model as their Bye-Laws. As the developer has an obligation [MOFA 1963 Section 10] he registers the latest Model Bye-Laws making members to sign their acceptance thereof without even making them aware as to what they were signing. The acquisition of multiple flats, or flats just as an investment and renting out, subletting etc have all been substantially diluted under successive models as per the whims of authorities probably to let the real estate grow with a mistaken belief that increased stock will make the houses affordable to middle class.
This background suggests that an honest implementation of scheme of cooperative housing would not have brought in to existence a real estate business of which individual investors like the 50 members in your CHS are a part. A new terminology is freely used by the developers for “individual family’s dwelling units” as (housing) Stock in Trade which has now come to be known as Housing Inventory. The real estate players started hoarding this inventory like several commodities, driving the prices well beyond the reach of those who want to own and stay themselves. You can imagine that but for this dilution of Bye-Laws you could not have bought the flat just as an attractive investment.
Perhaps a very large number of members would not have any idea of this scheme and these developments. What has happened is those housing societies operating on 1984 Model have unauthorisedly diluted these provisions on the lines of latest Model 2014. I suggest you read my article about hazards of diluting sub-letting provisions to an extent that the society has lost its control on its own premises.
The Sub-letting Provisions as per 2014 Model are prejucial to the interest of housing societies. Read more on:
There are a few more posts on www.indiancooperative,com which you may go through if you found the logic in above article palpable, for not every one may agree with these views.
https://www.indiancooperative.com/cooperative-coffee-shop/ghettoization-of-minorities-in-housing-societies/ [ May 29 2015 ]
https://www.indiancooperative.com/cooperative-coffee-shop/ghettoization-of-minorities-in-housing-societies-part-2/ [ June 3 2015]
https://www.indiancooperative.com/co-op-news-snippets/bmc-vindicates-stand-taken-by-columnist-i-c-naik/ [August 26 2015]
The MC can not take a decision to refuse permission unless the CHS decides in General Meeting. MC can not refuse any request of a member without authrity of Bye Laws or members resolution.