Transfer Of Premises Form - Act Legislation Register: Fill & Download for Free

Thanks for the A2A.If the United States banned semi-automatic rifles like the AR 15 would gun owners turn their weapons in? Would there be a war?First off, no firearms “ban” effected by a U.S. Federal law to date has affected weapons legally possessed by civilians as of when the ban took effect. They have all “grandfathered” these weapons, and only the NFA placed any restrictions on future transfer of the restricted weapons. The 2018 version of the AWB, currently languishing in subcommittee, has similar language stating that the ban shall not apply to any weapon lawfully possessed as of when the ban becomes law (which will not happen in 2018 and likely not for the foreseeable future).As of this year there are an estimated 20 million weapons in civilian hands that met the definition of the 1994 AWB, with 25% of gun owners owning at least one. That number is almost entirely the result of post-2004 purchases, most of that in turn coming during the Obama Administration. As for the current proposed bills, from 2017 and 2018, which tighten the definition to a “one-feature rule” as some states have done (NY’s and CA’s versions of the bans being fairly legendary at this point), these definitions only raise the number of guns covered by the definition, and the total number of gun owners affected.So, a ban on further sales is so pointless that the NSSF was actually considering stating its official support of the measure, as nearly all the gun manufacturers in the country were telling the NSSF (the actual gun industry lobby; the NRA is an organization of gun owners) that the market for these rifles is all but saturated as it is. 2018 apparently gave the lie to that (official numbers from the ATF are not yet available even for 2017, but industry analysts and gun manufacturers still talk at least in vague figures, and indications are that Parkland reignited demand as Republicans couldn’t be sure their East Coast Republican President was going to toe the party line on firearms), but the point is that a proposed ban on these weapons that grandfathers the existing ones, as all the Federal ones have, would at this point be like closing the barn door after the cows are not only out, but in the next county.So, with that said, what about a ban that doesn’t grandfather the currently-owned rifles? That would be the worst-case scenario for gun owners, especially given current language of proposed bans, and the recent increase in interest in suppressors (which require a threaded barrel to attach the suppressor, and a semi-automatic rifle or pistol with a detachable magazine and threaded barrel would fall under the 2018 ban’s language). The number of suppressors legally registered under the NFA has increased fivefold since 2007, from about 285k to over 1.3 million, and for each of those there is at least one pistol or rifle with a threaded barrel, most of them semi-automatic. Without the weapon, the silencer’s just a threaded down-filled can.What would gun owners do? Good question.Option 1, very commonly theorized by both sides, is that you’d see a mass uprising of armed individuals determined to give the guns back in person, unloaded through the barrel, and with their owner cold and dead before anyone interested in confiscating it could get anywhere near the gun or owner. This is the worst-case scenario for all involved, and it’s very unlikely for several reasons:The rank and file patrol officers, who’d be the ones going house to house serving warrants, are commonly gun owners themselves, beyond their service weapons. There are departments in every state, with thousands of officers, whose sole job is to work with gun owners to ensure the weapons are used safely and lawfully (game wardens/game rangers), many of whom spend their off-duty hours right out in the blinds with a rifle alongside ordinary civilians. And they’re not all hunting deer with .308s. A new ban with enforced confiscation would literally pit brother against brother.Recall that the estimate is about 25% of the gun-owning public, own a weapon falling under the 1994 definition of an “assault weapon”, and the proposed definitions for new bans have only gotten broader since. Sure, many have no military training and so would be little more than a rabble, but using the middle-of-the-road estimate of 85 million gun owners in the U.S., we’re talking about a rabble of 20 million people, a rabble that outnumbers the sworn police force of this country by something like 27 to 1. You could muster every person in this country empowered to make arrests and send them out into the streets with 100% mindless compliance, and every one of those officers would be required to take the guns away from 25 people, one way or another, without quitting or dying.An enforced confiscation would be impractical in most of the country (all of it, really), because the police have no idea where they all are. There is no nationwide registry of guns or gun owners, and states that have tried it have so far seen compliance rates as low as 4%. For every house where the police may know there’s a banned weapon (or at least be confident enough for a search warrant), there are 24 other houses that have a weapon that didn’t come up on any searchable records. Maybe the house on the other side of the street, or four in a cul-de-sac. And actually going house to house, kicking in every door and turning it upside-down looking for guns would have the ACLU finally on the same side as the NRA for all practical purposes, arguing that the government’s policy is so facially violative of the Fourth Amendment that anyone having anything to do with it should have a bench warrant issued for their arrest for malfeasance in office. This would create a Constitutional crisis the like of which the U.S. has never seen; law enforcement would be torn between obeying executive orders to enforce the statute law, and obeying court orders to stand down (or vice versa), on a national level.So, not very likely. You’ll have police either resigning or straight up refusing to follow orders left and right, dramatically reducing the executive power to enforce such a law, and the Army has no law enforcement powers within the United States except under martial law, which is only legal if the courts in the jurisdiction are not functioning (and the Supreme Court ruled that Louisiana, post-Katrina, had a functioning court system and so martial law was illegal; if New Orleans, underwater, was not sufficient grounds for martial law, I really don’t want to see what would be a valid situation for it). The National Guard can be deputized in certain situations, but that’s at the Governor’s discretion, and the President can only override State control of the Guard when the State is using the Guard in violation of Constitutional civil rights. So, as long as the 2A is legally functional, the President’s hands are tied; he can only use the National Guard units to oppose a confiscation when a Governor has mobilized the Guard to enforce one. And anyway, the larger the force you try to muster, the more people you involve in this debate, and the more of them will remember that they serve the Constitution first and the President second.Option 2 is passive resistance. This takes many forms:Ballot box opposition - Any move by Democrats to ban assault weapons, successful or failed, will harden the political lines. 25% of Democrats are gun owners themselves, so a blanket move to ban very popular weapons like ARs will likely see most of those cross the aisle, so Dems will find themselves reduced to as little as 3/4 of their current constituency, all moving over to the GOP, who could nominate a ham sandwich at that point as long as the voter base were confident it would never sign a new gun control law.Tragic boating accidents - Remember I said that there is no national registry, and state registries have very low compliance. The best the police could do in most cases is to knock on the door real polite and inquire as to the whereabouts of such and such a gun that they have some probably outdated documentation on. The gun owners will have a ready script: “Oh, I lost that one a long time ago in a really deep lake in another state.”. The police can think you’re lying all they want. That won’t get them a search warrant. Recall that any move for a forced mass confiscation, even with blanket warrants, would be contested within hours in every single court in the nation by both the ACLU and the NRA. They’ll contest the grounds for the warrant, the constitutionality of such broad applicability, and where there isn’t a warrant at all the plaintiffs will have a field day in court tearing the entire policy apart.Nonviolent opposition - Marches. Rallies. Parades. With or without permits, but largely without weapons; a show of pure human force. If you thought the March for Our Lives rally was big, you ain’t seen nothing. We’re talking about empty-holster rallies totally shutting down every major city for days at a time.Gun owners are numerous, and while no longer a true majority of Americans, they tend to be among the most motivated voting base any political party could ask for. Gun owners are a large part of the reason Trump was elected; Clinton made no secret of her dislike for guns and calls for gun control, and while it may seem shallow, guns are enough of an issue to have one of the largest single-issue activist bases in the country. Just like Obama was elected as “not another Republican who got us into this economic mess”, Trump was elected as “not another Democrat who will continue to push Obama’s misguided gun control and broken criminal justice reform policies”.Option 3?Sit back and laugh right alongside the police at the ineptitude and naivete of the legislators.No, I’m serious.Massive noncompliance with SAFE Act'No' Sheriff in Town: Some Lawmen Refuse to Enforce Federal Gun Laws.Sheriffs Refuse to Enforce Laws on Gun ControlGun control still 'not the issue' for law enforcement despite police attacksAnd these are in states and locates where strict gun control measures are getting out of the Legislature. Can you imagine telling Texas Gov. Greg Abbott that he’s got to give the ATF and FBI his full cooperation for a statewide confiscation? He deployed the State Guard to observe joint military training exercises at Ft. Hood, on the premise that it could be a prelude to a military coup by the Obama Administration. As kooky as I think that move was, it erases any doubt over what he’d actually order state and local law enforcement to do in the face of a confiscation order. And Texas is heading purpler; I can only imagine what the Feds would face in Appalachia or the Rockies, or the Plains States north of the Lone Star. You know, all those hard-working backbone-of-America types making up 80–90% of an entire region’s population, that won’t quite have forgotten about being called a “basket of deplorables”.

. Introduction1.1 The Maharashtra Ownership Flats(Regulation of the Promotion, Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer)Act,1963(“the MOFA”)has been enacted to regulate the promotion, construction, sale, management and transfer of flats sold on an ownership basis within the State of Maharashtra. The MOFA is an important piece of legislation as it lays down the responsibilities of real estate developers / builders in respect to flats sold by them and conversely the rights of flat purchasers within the State.II. Important DefinitionsThe MOFA lays down certain important definitions.2.1 FlatThe MOFA defines the term to mean:a) A separate and self-contained premises,b) Which is used or is intended to be used as a Residence, office, show-room, shop, godown, carrying on of any industry or business Including a garage.c ) And the premises forms part of a building.The term flat also includes an apartment. The Explanation to the definition provides that even if a separate bathing, washing, sanitary, etc. arrangement is made between two or more premises, they shall be deemed to be separate and self-contained.Thus, in order to be construed to be a flat, all the above ingredients must be fulfilled. This is an important definition because if a premises is not regarded as a flat the provisions of the MOFA do not apply. A common misconception is that the provisions of the MOFA only apply to residential premises.2.2 PromoterThe second most important definition is that of the term “promoter”. It is defined to mean a person:a) Who constructs or causes to be constructed.b) A block or building of flats or apartments.c) For selling all or any of them to a Company, Co-operative Society, Association of Persons .All the three limbs of the definition are important and all three must be satsified for construing a person to be a promoter. The term promoter includes his assigns and thus, if a person assigns his interests in the land to another person then the assignee would become a promoter . In the event that the builder and the person selling the flats are different, then both of them are promoters. The decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Ramniklal Kotak v. Varsha Builders AIR 1992 Bom 62 is very relevant on this issue. A mere contractor of the builder would not come within the definition of the term.III. Responsibilities / Liabilities of the Promoter3.1 S.3 of the MOFA casts onerous responsibilities upon a promoter who constructs a building of flats which are to be “taken on ownership basis”. It is strange that though the term “ownership basis” has been used in the MOFA it has not been defined anywhere. The responsibilities of the Promoter u/s. 3 are as follows:a) Make a full and true disclosure of(i) His title to the land along with a title certificate and an entry in the Property Card of the same.(ii) All encumbrances on the land.(iii) All outgoings for the property : rates, municipal taxes, cess, etc.(iv) The prescribed particulars in all advertisements for sale of flats.(v) The nature of fixtures, fittings, lifts, materials used in construction of the building, etc.b) Specify in writing the :(i) Date by which possession of the flat would be handed over.(ii) The precise nature of organisation of flat purchasers to be formed to which the title would be conveyed, e.g., company, co-operative society.c) Not part with possession until a Completion Certificate is received from the Municipal Corporation.d) Give inspection on 7 days notice of the approved plans and specifications.e)Maintain a list of flats taken or agreed to be taken with prescribed details.3.2 The Promoter is responsible for paying all outgoings including taxes in respect of the flats until he transfers the property to the flat owners/ society / company, etc.3.3 Once the approved plans and specifications are disclosed to the flat purchasers, the promoter cannot without the purchasers’ previous consent make any alterations or additions in the structures of the flats. In case the flat purchaser notifies any defect in the building/materials used/ any unauthorised changes, etc. within 3 years of taking possession, then the promoter shall, if possible, rectify the same free of cost.3.4 If the promoter fails to give possession of the flat as per the date specified in the agreement or any further agreed date or in case of any reasons beyond control within a further extended time of 6 months, then the promoter shall be liable on demand to refund the amounts received by him along with 9% interest per annum till the date of refund.3.5 After execution of the agreement for sale, the promoter cannot create any mortgage/charge on the flat without the consent of the flat purchaser.IV. Registration of Agreements4.1 U/s. 4 of the MOFA, before accepting any payment as advance payment or deposit from a flat purchaser, the Promoter has a liability to execute a written agreement in the prescribed format with every flat purchaser and to get this agreement registered under the Registration Act. Further, the amount of deposit or advance cannot exceed 20% of the sale price. U/s. 5 the Promoter is required to maintain separate bank accounts of sums taken as advance or deposit and he shall hold them for the purpose for which they were taken. The Bombay High Court’s decision in the case of Ramniklal Kotak v. Varsha Builders, AIR 1992 Bom 62 is relevant in this respect:“To prevent bogus sales being effected by a Promoter and to put a check to malpractices indulged in by the Promoters in regard to sales and transfer of flats, the Legislature has provided that the Promoter shall :a) Not accept any sum or money as advance payment or deposit more than 20% of the sale price;b) Enter into a written agreement with each individual flat owner.”The Bombay High Court in the case of Association of Commerce House Block Owners v. Vishnidas Samaldas (1981) 83 Bom. L.R. 339 held that the provisions of s. 4 are mandatory and not directory in nature.4.2 The prescribed particulars in respect of the Agreement which is specified in Form V are as under :a) The date by which possession of the flat would be handed overb) The carpet area and balcony area of the flat(shown separately)c) The price of the flat along with instalments in which the same is to be paidd) The precise nature of organisation of flat purchasers to be formede) The nature, extent, description and percentage of undivided interest in the common areas and facilitiesf) The copies of title certificate, property card extract, approved plans, etc.4.3 S.4A states that even if any agreement is not registered u/s. 4 of the MOFA, it is admissible as evidence in a suit for specific performance or as evidence for part performance u/s. 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. This section was inserted to overrule the Bombay High Court’s decision in the case of Association of Commerce House Block Owners v. Vishnidas Samaldas that non-registered agreements are wholly invalid and void ab initio and create no rights between the parties.V. Conveyance of title5.1 U/s. 10 of the MOFA, as soon as the minimum number of persons required for forming a co-operative society or a company have taken flats, the promoter must within 4 months submit the application for formation of a co-operative society or a company. This section recognises a company as a valid form of organisation as opposed to a society. The promoter must then u/s. 11 convey his title to such an organisation of the flat takers within 4 months of the date of formation of the society or the company (provided no date has been agreed upon).VI. Offences6.1 Any promoter guilty of contravention of s.3 (general liabilities), s.4 (registration of agreement), s.5(maintenance of separate accounts for deposits), s.10 (formation of society or company) or s.11 (conveyance of title) shall, on conviction, be punished with a term up to 3 years and/or a fine.6.2 Any promoter who commits a criminal breach of trust in respect of any advance or deposit given to him for specified purposes shall, on conviction, be punished with a term up to 5 years and/or a fine. The penalty for contravening any other provision of the Act, on conviction, is a term of up to 1 year and/or a fine of up to Rs. 10,000.VII. Directors’ Responsibilities7.1 The responsibilities of the directors of a company which is acting as a promoter of a building, etc. are very onerous. They must be extremely careful and cautious in exercising their duties as the penalties provided under the Act are very severe and in most cases they result in imprisonment.7.2 The Act also provides that where the person committing any offence is a company, then every person who at the time of the offence was responsible for the conduct of the business of the company as well as the company would be directly liable to be punished.7.3 Further, any director with whose connivance, neglect or active consent any offence has been committed by the company, shall also be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be directed proceeded against and punished.Here are few tips while purchasing new house or building.Approvals from different departments (Whether the builder received approvals from various departments)1. Approvals from municipality/ municipal corporation.2. Approval from Airport authorities.3. Approval Electricity Boards.4. Approval from Area development authorities.5. Approval from pollution control boards.6. Approvals from Forest & Agriculture.sourceFlat Ownership Act (Mofa)

My answer is for Maharashtra only.In the words of the Court :The promoter has no right to sell any portion of such building which is not ‘flat’ within the meaning of Section 2(a-1) of MOFA and the entire land and building has to be conveyed to the organisation; the only right remains with the promoter is to sell unsold flats. It is, thus, clear that the promoter has no right to sell ‘stilt parking spaces’ as these are neither ‘flat’ nor appurtenant or attachment to a ‘flat’.Stilt parking space' is not covered by the term `garage' much less a `flat' and it is part of common areas.The court said thatStilt parking space/s being part of common areas, the only right that the promoter has is to charge the cost thereof in proportion to the carpet area of the flat from each flat purchaser. Such stilt parking space being neither a `flat' nor a `garage' within the meaning of under Section 2(a-1) of MOFA, cannot be sold separately.The definition of garage is not provided in the MOFA. Hence, English language definitions needed to be looked into.The Oxford English Dictionary explains `garage' as a building for housing a motor vehicle or vehicles or an establishment which sells fuel or which repairs and sells motor vehicles. The Webster Comprehensive Dictionary explains the word `garage' as a building in which motor vehicles are stored and cared for.The Development Control Regulations for Greater Bombay, 1991 define two expressions, `garage-private' and `garage-public' in Regulations 2(47) and 2(48) respectively. According to these Regulations,`garage-private' means a building or a portion thereof designed and used for the parking of vehicles and `garage-public' means a building or portion thereof designed other than as a private garage, operated for gain, designed and/or used for repairing, serving, hiring, selling or storing or parking motor-driven or other vehicles.The developer had argued that open parking space amounts to a `garage' within the meaning of Section 2(a-1). However, the Court disagreed with this argument and said that a person buying a flat for residence or one of the uses mentioned in Section 2(a-1) will not really think that open to the sky or open space for parking motor vehicles is a garage.The word `garage' may not have uniform connotation but definitely every space for parking motor vehicles is not a garage. A roofless erection could not be described a garage. What is contemplated by a `garage' in Section 2(a-1) is a place having a roof and walls on three sides. It does not include an unenclosed or uncovered parking space.What is a flat ?The Court examined the provisions of Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 ("MOFA") to determine whether open or stilt parking spaces can be sold to purchasers separately, because the answer to the question would lie in the basic interpretation of what is a flat. As per Section 2(a-1) of MOFA,Flat" is defined to mean a separate and self-contained set of premises used or intended to be used for residence, or office, show-room or shop or go down or for carrying on any industry or business (and includes a garage), the premises forming part of a building and includes an apartment.Apart from the statutory definition, flat means ,A set of rooms comprising an individual place of residence within a larger building or a self-contained set of rooms, structurally divided and separately owned or let from the rest of a building, which for the most part consists of other flats separated in like manner. Also, In Stroud's Judicial Dictionary, a reference has been made to the observations of Somervell L.J, in Murgatroyd v. Tresarden [63 T.L.R. 62] and it is stated; the natural meaning of the word `flat' is a separate self-contained dwelling.Therefore, for a `flat' to be within the meaning of the definition in Sec. 2 (a-1), it must be a separate unit conforming to the description capable of being used for one of the purposes given in the definition. Separateness of one premises from another premises physically and also in use or intended use for one of the uses specified in the definition clause containing the necessary facilities for self-contained accommodation for a unit being covered by the definition of `flat' occurring in Section 2(a-1).Also, the Court has categorically stated that,The meaning and significance of the bracketed portion "(and includes a garage)" should be seen in the context given to the word `flat' which is true indication of intent of the legislature. The phrase `and includes a garage' in the bracket does not bring in `garage' by itself within the meaning of word `flat'. If stand alone `garage' was intended by the legislature to be a `flat' within the meaning of Section 2(a-1), that could have been conveyed by use of the expression `or garage' after the word `business' in the same breath as preceding uses. The bracketed phrase is indicative of the legislative intention to include a `garage' as appurtenant or attachment to a flat which satisfies the ingredients of Section 2(a-1).When it comes to charges levied for parking spots, the law states,Under Section 84 of the MOFA Act, Every member who has allotted the stilt or the parking space shall be required to pay the parking charges at such rate as may be decided by the General body of the Society at its meeting, irrespective of the fact whether he actually parks his motor vehicle or not. The Society can recover different rates for different types of vehicles.Here are some FAQ’s about Parking Spaces and answers to themCan a member hold a parking space if he has purchased the same?A builder has to provide a certain number of parking spaces basis the number of units of houses. As per a mandate from the Mumbai High Court, the builder is not allowed to sell parking spaces outside the FSI consumed. This has been confirmed by the Supreme Court of India too.How can the managing committee handle the allotment of parking spaces?Parking spaces are common spaces which belong to the housing society. Allotment of the same is at their discretion and the same can be done by means of First Come, First Serve or however the managing committee deems fit.Who owns the parking space?The apartment complex “Solely” owns the common spaces (Stilt or Open)The members DO NOT own these spacesAllotment of Parking space is a “Administrative function” and the Managing Committee as well as General Body are empowered to allot the parking space to its own registered membersRegistered members include family members and associate membersTenants are Nominal Members and have no rights of a regular member, which includes having no rights of parking in the CHS premises. However, at the discretion of the Managing Committee, parking can be an extended as humanitarian facility to the nominal members.Parking area (Stilt, Open or whatever) is not covered under Floor Space Index (FSI) and hence is not saleable.The bye-law provision pertaining to Parking “RIGHTS” is a gross violation of the various BMC & Fire act rules and has got no force of law, in Court of Law.Can the Managing Committee refuse to allot parking space to its members?Parking space number is decided basis the Lay-Out Plan (LOP) as approved by the civic body (BMC). It is also under the Development Control Rules and under the Fire Act rules. The managing committee has to adhere to these and basis that allot parking spaces.What are the typical parking charges?The typical parking charges are laid down by the general body. They may range from Rs. 10 to Rs. 10,000 per month. It also depends on the type of vehicle i.e. 2 wheeler, 4 wheeler and so on. It is applicable only to registered members.Who is responsible for the maintenance of the parking space? Can parking deposit be collected?The Managing Committee is responsible for the maintenance of the parking space. Its upkeep and safety of the vehicles has to be ensured by the managing committee members. They also have to provide common area lights and security for the members and the vehicles. Parking spaces are common areas and hence deposit cannot be collected even if it is passed in the General Body Meeting. MCS Rule 39 restricts these rights of society to raise funds.References :http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/law-on-parking-spaces-1116-1.htmlhttp://apartmentadda.com/blog/2015/02/19/rules-pertaining-to-parking-spaces-in-apartment-complexes/