Insurance Cheating
 | |
| This query is : Resolved | |
 Author : Dinildinesh0 Posted a day ago | Hiii..my frnd took an insurance from a frnd of her....and it says that she will gets 180million vnd if she paid 100 million vnd(Vietnamese dong) she is Vietnamese citizen....since it was her frnd she signed without reading much...she didnt paid yet..but now the company days she will only get 60million vnd after 15 yrs or she got injured.....so i want to ask that CAN SHE CANCEL THE INSURANCE EVEN IF SHE SIGNED??OR IS THERE ANYWAY TO SUE THE CHEATING COMPANY...pls help me |
Case dismissed by the consumer forum (Others)
This query is : Resolved Author : Guddoo Yadav
Posted a day ago
Dear sir,
I have filled my Consumer Court Case in Years-2008 in Thane Court. Since Last 7 Years there is no Judgement given by the Court and no action is taken by the court against opposite party. The court gives 3-4 times of hearing in a year. As starting stage and upto 5-6 Years i was regular in court but the court is giving always date of next hearing because the opposite party is always absent.
Due to this way i am totally harrashed by the court because they are not giving me their judgement.
But this Year in the month of April they have Dismissed the case because the reason that i was absent and they have mentioned that i am always absent.
But during hearing i was not in to Mumbai and i was in Uttar pradesh because of my marriage. i have my journey ticket also.
The Consumer Court dismissed the case because of i was not present. But i am not satisfied with the court. Because i have spend Around Rs. 30000/- including my Travelling expenses, and other cost within this 6 Years.
I want to go against this Consumer Court decision in my absence and i want to open my case file again.
Please advise me what i do in this case ???
My Case no is- CC/418/08 in Thane, Maharashtra. Please check the thean court decision on CDRF Website.
Bye laws of a Co-operative society
By : Hemant Agarwal on 16 June 2015 
Print this 
Analysis on: BYE LAWS of a Coop. Society:
01. PREAMBLE:
a) A Coop. Society, is by default an Autonomous Body, due to the fact that Society services, duties & responsibilities are related and binding ONLY on its own members, and not on others (who-so-ever). It is akin to a Local Self Government, hence Bye-Laws have to be Society Specific.
b) Each Bye-Law is unique to each Society and to its own Members, which means "uniform bye-laws" CANNOT be formulated, since even in Housing Societies, there are Societies which are Tenant Co-partnership Society and then there are Tenant-Ownership Society. The objectives of both these type of Societies are totally different, hence the self-governance provisions (means Bye-Laws) are to be made differently, BUT, compulsorily within the provisions and parameters of the MCS Act & Rules.
c) Society Bye-Laws are a set of suggestive guide-lines for the specific usage of those members, who voluntarily commit themselves to be self-governed and self-regulated by it and such bye-law provisions have necessarily to be under a specific Act (eg. MCS Act), which certainly means that such Bye-Laws have local & limited application.
d) Society Bye-Laws are Voluntary guidelines, to be self-imposed, more so since a Coop Society can make numerous Modifications / Additions / Deletions / Alterations (within the parameters u/s 13, 14, 16 r/w rule 8, 9, 12, 13 of the MCS Act). The jurisdiction of Modifications / Additions / Deletions / Alterations are with the General Body members of a Coop. Society AND CANNOT BE WITH THE COOP. REGISTRAR and/or with the Federation OR any other body, which means the Registrar cannot impose his orders on adopting any fixed Pre-Printed Model Bye-Laws that the Registrar whimsically thinks is appropriate, for EACH & EVERY Society.
02. WHO CAN COMPOSE A COOP. SOCIETY BYE-LAW ?
a) EACH & EVERY duly registered Coop. Society can compose / formulate their own brand new set of bye-Laws, including appendix and transfer forms, BUT ONLY after due consultation and approval of the General Body members of the Society.
b) NO two bye-laws need to be similar, under any circumstances. Bye-Laws are Society specific and not generalized.
c) Presently, there is no law, which mandates that pre-printed bye-laws and /or bye-laws, prescribed by the Coop. Dept., or the District Federation, should be adopted, which again will not be tenable under the Law. Therefore a Coop. Society, need not adopt the static model bye-laws available in the open market and in a website.
d) Under the parameters u/s 13, 14, 16 r/w rule 8, 9, 12, 13 of the MCS Act, a Coop. Society is empowered with the jurisdiction of Composing totally new Bye-Laws, as per its own whims and fancies, subject to & restricted to the provisions of the Act & Rules.
e) A minimum and clear mandatory FOURTEEN days static notice is required to be given to all the Society members (under Bye-Law no. 167), with a General Body meeting agenda specific for "adopting proposed bye-laws". The presence of a minimum of 67% (2/3rd) members is mandatory at such General Body meeting, to adopt such proposed bye-laws. Such general body may delete / modify / add any number of such proposed bye-laws. After adoption of such proposed bye-laws is completed, the adopted bye-laws have to be submitted to the ward Coop. Registrar, who alone has the jurisdiction to scrutinize & approve & register the Bye-Laws, subsequent to which the registered bye-laws may be implemented for voluntary self-governance amongst its own members. The Registrar may direct the Society to amend a particular bye-law, ONLY IF the specific bye-law contravenes the MCS Act and Rules, OTHERWISE the Coop. Registrar has no lawful jurisdiction to enforce his own whimsical thoughts in the bye-laws. The jurisdiction of the Registrar is restricted to directing the Society to make its own bye-law under rule 8(1), subsequent to which he has to mandatorily scrutinize the bye-laws put before him, then approve and register the bye-laws, ONLY FOR THAT SPECIFIC Coop. Society.
f) Coop. Society Bye-Laws can be lawfully & unrestrictingly Added / Modified / Deleted, every second month, after following due procedures. Here the Coop. Registrar has no jurisdiction to restrain or restrict the Society from repeatedly amending its Bye-Laws.
g) Coop. Society Bye-Laws can be freshly formulated by themselves or thru an legal expert. This is done after considering various aspects and needs of the specific society. A 3 floor society can have a different bye-law and a 40 floor tower building can have a different bye-law. The Coop. Registrar imposed or formulated bye-law does not have any legal force of law and can be safely junked down the sewage drain.
h) Bye-Laws are formulated for the specific purposes, AS & WHEN required by the members of the Society for their own specific requirements. These specific requirements CANNOT be known or imagined by the Coop. Registrar and hence such specific requirements may not be incorporated in the Coop. Registrar imposed or formulated bye-laws.
03. HERD MENALITY:
a) It is grossly evident that almost all Societies follow a standard set of Model Bye-Laws, without making any amendments (Additions / Deletions / Modifications), that too, evidently without any application of mind.
b) This static set of Model Bye-Laws, are usually the cause of mass discontent and gross disputes in a Coop. Society.
c) This static set of Model Bye-Laws, are misused by the Mg. Committee, to harass, subdue & demoralize the general society members, into staying away from active participations in the affairs of an autonomous Coop. Society.
d) Various Book-Sellers, Associations and Federations, just simply mint money, by selling hundreds of thousands of standard MODEL bye-laws, to those gullible Societies, who are always ready to be corrupted. The Coop. Dept., inspite of being a legal guardians of the Cooperative movement, prefers to remain mute spectators to such obvious misleading and illogical activities and on the contrary grants permission to "print" such bye-laws, as is evident from the pages of the 2009 bye-laws (green cover).
04. CAN THE COOP. DEPT., COMPOSE ANY BYE-LAW:
a) It is not in the jurisdiction of the Coop. Dept to compose /formulate a Coop. Society Bye-Laws. They can at the most prepare a "GENERAL & SUGGESTIVE" set of "MODEL" Bye-Laws, which can be totally discarded by a Coop. Society, which means that a Coop. Society can make umpteen Modifications / Additions / Deletions / Alterations, which in turn means that a Coop. Society can compose / formulate its own bye-laws, by following due procedures.
b) The Coop. Ministry / Dept. can only compose / formulate Laws (MCS Act & Rules) THAT TOO only after the peoples representatives (Legislature) has approved and passed it. IT is not the business nor the jurisdiction of the Coop. Ministry, to compose a Coop. Society Bye-Laws. The suggestive guidelines in the Model Bye-Law have no force of Law and cannot be considered or taken cognizance of in matters which reach the court, when such bye-laws supersede the legislative Act.
c) The Authoritive jurisdiction of the Coop. Registrar (of the ward) is limited and restricted to "Scrutinize & Approve and Register" the Bye-Laws, duly submitted before him by a Coop. Society. Period .... Nothing else.
d) The Coop. Registrar is not bound to follow the Bye-Laws, when hearing disputes. However he is under mandatory duty to implement & enforce the provisions of the MCS Act & Rules, vis-à-vis the Society Bye-Laws.
e) It is lawfully unfeasible and untenable, for the Coop. Dept., to dictatorially impose a static set of Bye-Laws, by publishing the same on their website and issuing a dictatorial direction to all the autonomous Coop. Society to compel them to adopt his own formulated bye-laws, within a time-frame. This would amount to infringing on the autonomous authority of a Coop. Society, which further means stepping into the shoes of the General Body members.
f) Model Bye-Laws are not promulgated by any authority (including the state legislature) and does not have the sanction of the people's representatives of the Legislature.
05. WHAT CAN BE COMPOSED IN A SOCIETY BYE-LAW ?
a) All the SELF-Made & SELF-Regulatory guidelines (bye-laws) which can have a literal authority-of-law, for SELF-governance, BY the Society Members, OF the Society members and ONLY FOR the SPECIFIC Society (and not any other society).
b) The Coop. Dept., has no jurisdiction what-so-ever to direct the Societies to Add / Modify / Delete any bye-laws that is conformity of the MCS Act & Rules . The most that the ward Coop. Registrar can do is to reject OR approve & register the bye-laws put before him.
c) There is no need to formulate bye-laws pertaining to "Lift usage charges/services", if the society building does not have lifts. BUT the gullible Societies still keep on adopting those bye-laws, which has no relevance for governance in their society.
d) A bye-law can be composed & formulated by a Statutory Body (Municipal Body, other Local self-government bodies / associations). Such bye-laws may compose finer points / details / code of conduct / penalties and so on …. BUT necessarily and mandatorily as a subordinate sub-law, necessarily based on a Law (Act) passed by the local state legislature.
e) A dispute /grievance under the self-imposed bye-law provisions can be sorted out by the Society committee (alias Grievance redressal committee / Arbitration). The courts of law, would not have the jurisdiction to uphold the provisions of such untenable bye-laws and further the courts would not have the jurisdiction to act as a Grievance redressal committee / Arbitrator.
f) Bye-Laws could be totally UNIQUE and would vary from Society to Society, since ANY provisions of the bye-laws can be Added / Modified / Deleted umpteen number of times, by individual Societies. Bye-Laws are a "Self Code of Conduct", for self-governance and self-regulation (voluntary & autonomous which is implementable in nature).
g)Bye-Laws may specify specific duties and liabilities of the Mg. Committee and the Members (Meeting frequency, Penalties, Interest on Bill payments, Membership Transfer procedures & fees thereon, Sub-letting procedures and fees thereon, sub-ordinate rules & conditions, and so on)
h) Bye-Laws have necessarily to be under the provisions of a Act, and such Act is to be necessarily passed by the Legislature (meaning peoples representatives).
06. ORIDINANCE BASED BYE LAWS:
a) An ordinance is not a Act that is passed by the Legislature (meaning peoples representatives). An ordinance is issued under the unique & undisputable authority of the State Governor AND only the State Governor is within his territorial jurisdiction to promulgate an State Ordinance, IRRESPECTIVE of the fact that the said Ordinance does not have the mandate of the Legislature.
b) Ordinance is a Law, BUT does not have the same force as an Act, since the Ordinance does not have the mandate of the Legislature. Further in normal circumstances, the ordinance lapses by default by end of 6 weeks, until re-issued with due procedures (depending on various parameters).
c) India is a democratic country and the laws of the Country has to be formulated in a democratic manner, which means the laws of the country can be formulated only by the elected representatives of the people. IF at all an Ordinance had a Permanent force of law, THEN logically there would be no need for the legislature to compose laws AND the laws could always be created thru an ordinance, without the consent of the people.
d) The Coop. Dept., has no jurisdiction to nullify the Governors ordinance, which in turn means that no subordinate sub-laws can be created (here its means the Bye-Laws). Similarly AND IF AT ALL Bye-Laws are composed & formulated on the Governors Ordinance, THEN such Bye-Laws will also lapse with the lapse of the Ordinance (which is logically inevitable), .OR. as soon as a new Act is passed by the Legislature.
e) It would be illogical & meaningless to Adopt any bye-laws based on the Maharashtra Ordinance dated 15-02-2013 /25-04-2013, since this ordinance has to lapse, by legal default. Bye-Laws cannot be composed based on defunct Ordinances or Acts. Defunct bye-laws, would mean loss of Society members funds.
f) It would not be necessary that the exact & whole ordinance would be converted into a Act. The Legislature may decide otherwise and Add / Delete / Modify or compose its own Act, with or without any or all components of the ordinance. Here, a new bye-laws would have to be composed / formulated which would now be MANDATORILY based on the legislature-passed-Act, which means the earlier bye-laws based on the ordinance becomes defunct by default. The whimsical & dictatorial directions for adopting such defunct bye-laws, issued by the various Coop. Registrars have no force of Law and has now become a dictatorial burden on all the Coop. Societies, which indirectly means, loss of Society members funds.
Apathy, Ignorance, Arrogance, Ego are the bane of Cooperative Society's, which is evident from the consistent scores of litigations before the Registrar's office and in the Coop. Courts.
Author: Hemant Agarwal
Email: ha21@rediffmail.com
What the LAW should do now?
By : Satyam mishra on 17 June 2015 Print this 
To change the society first of all we have to change our mentality and then our law. We have to transform our law and legal system People friendly not People fearing. If a person fears from something, he will not follow that thing and will build a bad image of it in his mind. But when a person is friendly with something, he will follow it respect it.
The legal system or the law or the members of the legal system doesn't get happiness or satisfaction by punishing the people of their own society, but they have to do this as, that people gets out of their track of peace, morality, equality etc. There is no need of changing others, first the people should change themselves, and then the society will be automatically changed.
"No one is good or no one is bad, everyone is good and everyone is bad." It's upon the people that how they judge the things.
In true meaning our country will develop on that day when our people will start thinking firstly' about their country's wealth and peace and then there and their families and friends wealth and peace.
Who says jealousy is always bad? I don't think so. We should be jealous from the other countries that are more rapidly growing then us and we should make that jealousy our power and strength to increase our country's growth from them.
In spite of making draconian law we should make decorative law, which can decorate our society by peace, equality, and love and brother hoodness. As we know, law is made by the people for the people, then why the people are not obeying these laws. It is not possible for any law or government or judiciary to fear the huge population of 1.26 billion people by making draconian laws. We have to transform our legal system such, that the people should respect it and should spread it by themselves. Our priority should be changing the ill minds of our society which we can do through spreading legal awareness and knowledge from the grass root level to the highest level of the society. We have to start spreading legal knowledge from the school level as the mind of the school children are such that whatever they like they fix those things in their mind and follow it in the future as it is the initial growing maturity stage of the children.
We have to show the people or explain them that how a crime committed by a person changes the world of two families. First the victim's life who suffers the trauma for his/her whole life. Second the culprit's life whose whole life become meaningless and shameful. Because of the culprit's act his whole family suffers financial breakdown if he is the only bread owner of his family, shame in the society as the whole society starts saying and taunting that the whole family is criminal minded or the parents are guilty as they have not taught good manners and provide positive education.
Why so many people would suffer because of one? We have to spread it with a hope that even it can bring a simple change in the society then also it would be a very big thing for us.
Published in Others
|
Loksabha clears 119 amendment bill on May 7, 2015
By : Utsav Ghosh on 26 June 2015 Print this The Loksabha shows rare unanimity in passing the 119 amendment bill which allowed the operationalisation of the 1974 India and Bangladesh land boundary agreement. All the 331 members present in the house, voted for the Bill, which became the 100th Constitutional amendment after approval from the President Mr. Pranab Mukherjee. The Rajya Sabha on May, 2015 unanimously passed the historic amendment Bill that provides for exchange of territories to settle the 41 years old land border issue which received full support from 181 members.
This Constitutional amendment Bill is entered to end the decade of uncertainty for tens and thousands of citizens living in enclaves on wrong side of the homeland border. The amendment allows operationalisation of 1974 India Bangladesh land boundary agreement which refers to acquiring of territories by India and transfer of territories to Bangladesh through retaining of adverse possession and exchange of enclaves in accordance to 1974 agreement.
This Bill has amendment the first schedule of the Constitution which gave an effect to an agreement entered into by India and Bangladesh on the acquisition and transfer of territories between both the neighboring countries. The India and Bangladesh Bill was signed in the year 1974 between the then Prime Ministers Indira Gandhi and then then Prime Minister of Bangladesh Sheikh Mujibur Rehman. The Bill was the then rectified by the Bangladesh Parliament but not by India, as the Bill involved the transfer of territory which required the Constitutional Amendment.
The Bill refer to demarcated land boundaries which has gone into further modification through the exchange of letters thereafter and a protocol entered on September 6,201. The Bill being the Constitutional Amendment Bill requires further endorsement by the four affected states of Meghalaya, Tripura, Assam, West Bengal. The Bill paves the way for demarcating the border as well as exchange of over 160 enclaves between the two neighboring countries. Bangladesh received 111 enclaves i.e 17,160 acres and India received 51 enclaves i.e 7,110 acres from Bangladesh. Enclaves are landlocked territories that each country has within the borders of the other countries.
The proposed solution will enable each side to acquire the enclaves within its borders along with other disputed territories. People who are the inhabitants of these enclaves shall have the right to move to live in their original country of nationality or they may have the option to become the nationality of the new country after the exchange. There are 15,000/- Bangladeshi enclaves and with this new Land boundary agreement they will become part of India and the people here have the option to relocate to Bangladesh, as they prefer. Across the border there are around 100 enclaves that officially become part of Bangladesh. The four territories come under the ambit of the Bill.
Home Minister Sushma Swaraj had announced package of 3,008 cr. To West Bengal for rehabilitation of Indian Nationals who will come from Bangladesh, with numbers estimated to reach till 30,000/-. Of this the amount of Rs 775 cr. Will be used for fixed infrastructure and the remaining amount will be for variable expenses, depending on how many people are to be rehabilitated by the state government. The maritime border of India and Bangladesh was also settled last year with the award by the International Tribunal.
Published in Constitutional Law
Views : 639
When Fishing Becomes Fishy
By : BAPOO M. MALCOLM on 29 June 2015 Print this 
When the police is held in contempt
The High Court at Hyderabad is housed in a palace. It reeks of old-time majesty, especially in the courtrooms. Wooden panels, semi-circular tables for advocates, walls lined with All India Reporters giving instant access to judgements. One dreads the invasion of monitors on the judges' table, especially when two excellent legal issues were argued this week. A fruitful visit was concluded by this writer, in more ways than one.
From Hyderabad, we bring you a case that deals with easements, tribal rights and contempt of court. Yes, these can all be the matter of arguments in just one case.
Contempt of court, to the popular imagination, is an accused throwing his chappal at the magistrate. Or hurling the choicest swear words. A mild form of punishment is a civil contempt order, lasting for a few hours, usually called "…till the rising of the court." A more severe form is the criminal contempt notice, culminating in a sentence of incarceration, with or without a monetary fine. Of course, punishments for contempt. in earlier years. were corporal in nature. One book talks of hands being cut off and impaled on posts outside the court! We have, fortunately, moved on.
Easements means a right acquired by one (or many) without actually being a proprietor. Simply put, it is a right to enjoy a facility. It can mean a passage through another's property to reach one's home. It can be a right of way for traffic. An easement can be for fishing rights in a stream or a pond or on the coast, most usually available from long usage. It can be determined by a court.
In our case, it was a negative order. Fishing was banned, whatever be the reason. And that leads us to tribal rights. These are definite privileges accorded to certain people by demarcating areas for their use, usually exclusive use. People, who live near these places and whose families have lived off these parts for ages, are allowed to continue their livelihood. Being pristine zones, they are full of natural wealth like fruits, timber, grazing lands, fish from the streams, rivers and water bodies, eggs from birds' nests and other God-given bounty. Yet, no one kills the goose that lays the golden eggs. It's a win-win trade-off. Champanwalli village was one such hamlet and Ammanapalli was its fishing spot.
Civilisation is on the march. The 'fruit' is limited. Encroachment follows, insidiously at first, then more vocal and, later, by force. The simple people find that they have only one recourse; the court of law. Yet, a favourable order is often only a piece of paper in hand. Implementation by the poor folk, facing the might of the oppressors, is another kettle of fish. So, once again they bang on the doors of the court. Realising their plight, the court orders the local constabulary to protect the court-ordained rights. Usually, it turns out to be wishful thinking. One need not wonder why Naxalism and Chipko movements seem the only way out, illegal though they may be.
In our case, the cops did nothing, when it came to fishing by those exclusively banned from the site. The police failed to prevent the breaches of the law. Law enforcement agencies became spectators to, and therefore participants in, open flouting of the mandates. The usual Nelson's eye syndrome.
You be the judge. What would you do, if the affected people came to you once again?
The court came down heavily on the Karimnagar rural circle inspector and two cops. Contempt of court was slapped on them. The cops were sentenced to three months each and fined Rs2,000, pending appeal. Yet, another victory for the common man. Unfortunately, such judgements are few and far between. More unfortunate is that they are little advertised. A copy of such orders, posted on the walls of every chowky, will not only to warn the errant but also to allow the citizenry to know its rights, options and recourses.
Bapoo Malcolm is a practising lawyer in Mumbai. Please email your comments to mail@moneylife.in
Published in Others
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment