To avoid problems like Campa Cola later on, home buyers and cooperative societies must ensure that the issue of conveyance deed is sorted so that the CHS becomes title holder of the society land
In the final piece in the run up to Vinod Sampat event to be held on 23 November 2013 in Mumbai, Mr Sampat talks about one of the most pressing issues that home buyers, cooperative societies and apartment owners face today: conveyance deed or deemed conveyance. To avoid major problems later on, or to avoid problems such as Campa Cola compound residents, you will need to first resolve the issue of becoming legal title holder of the land through conveyance deed or deemed conveyance. In the Campa Cola compound case, since the builder constructed illegal floors, it never handed over the land of the plot to the Society (deemed conveyance) as mandated under the laws.
Whose responsibility is it to convey the title?
As per the provisions of section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownerships Flats Act (MOFA), the promoter is duty-bound to complete his title and convey the same to the organisation of persons who had bought the flat (i.e. cooperative society, CHS, home buyer, apartment owner, etc). The Conveyance has to be executed and the promoter or builder has to deliver the title relating to the property. It is also the duty of the promoter to file a copy of the conveyance with the flat purchasers and the competent authority under section 11(2).
The buyer after forming a cooperative society (or CHS) also can approach the competent authority for obtaining a unilateral deemed conveyance in favour of the legal entity i.e. cooperative society, CHS, apartment or a company.
The competent authority on receiving such application shall within reasonable time but in any case, not later than six months after making such enquiries as deemed necessary, after verifying authenticity of the document submitted, after giving the promoter reasonable opportunity for being heard, shall issue a certificate to the sub-registrar or any other appropriate registration authority under The Registration Act, 1908. This certifies that there is a fit case for enforcing unilateral execution of Conveyance Deed, conveying the right title and interest of the promoters in the land and building in favour of the applicant as Deemed Conveyance.
Submissions made by the cooperative society or apartment owner to the sub-registrar shall, (or the appropriate registering authority), on the basis of the certificate issued by the competent authority, along with the unilateral instrument of conveyance, notwithstanding anything contained in The Registration Act, 1908, issue summons to the promoters as to why unilateral instrument should not be registered as Deemed Conveyance.
After giving the promoter reasonable opportunity of being heard, after being satisfied that is a fit case for unilateral conveyance, (the competent authority or sub-registrar) shall register instrument as deemed conveyance.
Deemed conveyance in our view is doomed conveyance
You should approach consumer forum where you can get the property card transferred directly besides daily compensation for not getting building completion certificate. In Environ Emmanual CHS Ltd, an order was passed in 128 days by consumer forum. However, normally it takes one to two years. Interim order may be passed in about four hearings.
“Speed money” in deemed conveyance is an open secret ALLEGED by one MP. Despite political will, a small percentage of the societies have got deemed conveyance order. Irrespective of the claim of authorities not even 25 societies, in our view, have got the property card transferred in their name till date.
Other conveyance-related issues covered by Moneylife in the past can be accessed below:
Many housing societies are keen for redevelopment but they cannot go for redevelopment for want of conveyance. Advocate KK Ramani, an expert on realty issues, spoke recently at a Moneylife Foundation seminar, explained the intricacies of the laws governing housing societies. Check out the entire write up here:
The video of the KK Ramani’s Deemed Conveyance seminar event can be accessed here:
Previous parts can be accessed below:
Check the first part over here
Check the second part here
Check the third part here
Check the fourth part here
Those seeking help or advice on CHS issues can contact Moneylife Foundation’s Legal Resource Centre (LRC) ( http://moneylife.in/lrc.html )
(Adv Vinod Sampat is a practising lawyer since past 28 years. He has authored several articles on property-related matters and written 46 books on cooperative societies, transfer of flats, recovery of dues, registration and stamp duty matters. He has been an Hon. Patron member of the Estate Agents Association of India. He is also the Hon. Advisor of the Federation of Accommodation Industry of India and is an advisor to the Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry as well as the Federation of Accommodation Industry in India, apart from being part of many committees and winning several honours.)
Over the six-month period from April 2013 to September 2013, Independent Financial Advisors (IFAs) contributed the maximum (37%) to equity mutual fund sales
Most Independent Financial Advisors (IFAs), a ‘small’ mutual fund distributor community, were worried that they would lose business with the launch of direct plans of mutual funds. Many even complained that few of their clients have shifted to direct plans. However, IFAs, who cater mainly to small investors, have not only been successful in creating new mutual fund accounts in beyond the top 15 cities (B15 cities) they have done comparatively well in the top 15 (T15) cities as well. From their contributions to new systematic accounts created, it can be said that IFAs are not only promoting one time investments, but are encouraging regular savings as well. IFAs increased their share of equity mutual fund sales to 37% in H1FY14 from 33% in H1FY13.
Taking all mutual fund categories into consideration, IFAs contributed the highest share of 33.25% to new accounts created for bullet investments and 30.19% to new SIP accounts created between April 2013 and September 2013, according to data from CAMS, a registrar and transfer agent for mutual funds which accounts for 60% of the industry data. Overall, they contributed 31.74% to the total number of new accounts created. The next highest were other banks with a share of 23.74% in the six month period.
Equity Mutual Fund Sales
Despite a marked increase in the contribution of direct plans to equity mutual fund sales, IFAs too, managed to increase their share, even though the quantum of sales declined. The share of direct plans in equity mutual fund sales rose to 13% in H1FY14 from 5% in H1FY13. IFAs, managed to increase their share to 37% in H1FY14 from 33% in H1FY13. Banks witnessed a sharp decline, with their share falling to 18.52% from 26.08% over the same period. In H1FY14, national distributors had a share of 22%, while PSU banks had the lowest share of 2.33%.
In the T15 cities, IFAs took the lead for the top share in equity mutual with 31% in H1FY14 from 27% in H1FY13 surpassing national distributors and other banks which commanded a higher share for the same period the previous year. In the B15 cities, though IFAs still contribute more than half to the total equity mututal fund sales, their share fell marginally to 54% in H1FY14 from 55% in H1FY13. In these cities, national distributors increased their share to 16% from 11% in the same period last year.
SIP accounts created
IFAs also have the highest share for the number of new mutual fund SIP accounts created in H1FY14. In T15 cities IFAs have a share of 28% in the total new SIP accounts, marginally higher than national distributors which command a share of 27%. In B15 cities where IFAs have the strongest presence, they contributed 33% to the total number of new mutual fund SIP accounts created, while other banks and national distributors had a share of 22% and 21% respectively.
In T15 cities, other banks contributed the highest to new accounts created for lumpsum (or bullet) investments. IFAs were the second highest contributors with a share of 27%. In B15 cities, IFAs once again took the lead with a share of 46%. National distributors were the closest with a share of just 16%.
Despite this huge contribution from IFAs, the regulator continues to ignore this ‘small’ distributor community by coming up with regulations that harms their business. (Read: Mutual fund regulations: Who contributes the most to equity inflows is overlooked) Many IFAs have been asking for a ban on upfront commissions. Moneylife has highlighted in many articles in the past where distributors have resorted to excessive churning to earn higher commissions. Chilukuri KRL Rao, a small distributor from Hyderabad, has drawn our attention to the ground-level practices that hurt investors and smaller distributors. He says, “Small distributors who cater mainly to the small retail investors are willing to work even with low trail commissions due to their cost efficient business model. But, the main hindrance to the growth of the industry seems to be the way these incentives are being paid to a distributor.”
In a recent article, (Read: Equity mutual funds report rising sales outside top 15 cities!) we pointed out that mutual fund houses could be paying a higher upfront commission to national distributors for sales in B15 cities. This could be a reason why equity mutual fund sales in B15 cities have shown a growth while all investor categories in both T15 and B15 cities have reported a decline in sales. The Association of Mutual Funds in India (AMFI), has been known to support big fund houses and large distributors. Last year, AMFI scrapped the plan to ban upfront commission. Trail commissions, though lower than the one-time upfront commission, support the business model of small distributors and IFAs as they establish long-term relationships with their clients.
Under the whistleblower programme, in case a tip-off results in monetary sanctions of over $1 million, individuals concerned can get 10-30% of the sanctions collected
US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has received as many as 18 whistleblower tip-offs from India during the 12-months to end-September. These tips were provided to the SEC for probing into various market related irregularities. UK topped the charts with 66 such tip-offs to SEC.
Overall, the SEC received more than 400 whistleblower tip-offs from various countries during the financial year 2013 (October 12-September 13).
The UK is followed by Canada at the second place with 62 tip-offs on instances of possible wrongdoings, China at 52, Russia at 20, India and Ireland 18 each and Australia at 15.
The annual report is prepared by the SEC staff as part of the US government whistleblower programme. The programme allows individuals to provide information on possible violations of securities regulation, without revealing their identity.
The regulator received 557 tip-offs related to corporate disclosures and financial reports, 553 on fraud, 525 information on manipulation and 196 concerning to insider trading, it said.
“Since the beginning of the whistleblower programme, the Commission has received whistleblower tip-offs from individuals in 68 countries outside the US. In fiscal year 2013 alone, the Commission received submissions from individuals in 55 foreign countries,” the report said.
Among other countries, SEC got 8 tip-offs each from Switzerland and Italy, seven from France, four from Singapore and one from Malaysia.
Besides, the number of tip-offs and complaints received by the US regulator increased to 3,238 in the fiscal year 2013 from the preceding fiscal.
Under the programme, in case a tip-off results in monetary sanctions of over $1 million, individuals concerned can get 10-30% of the sanctions collected.
The regulator paid over $14 million in awards during the year, the report added.