5. accPromoter to maintain separateount of sums taken as advance or deposit and to be trustee therefore and disburse them for the purpose for which are given.- The promoter shall maintain a separate account in any bank of sums deposit, including any sums so taken towards the share capital for the information of a co-operative society or a company, or towards the outgoings (including ground rent if any, municipal or other local taxes, taxes on income, water charges, electricity charges, revenue assessment, interest on any mortgage or other encumbrances if any); and he shall hold the said moneys for the purposes for which they were given and shall disburse the moneys for those purpose and shall on demand in writing by 1[a Competent Authority], make full and true disclosure of all transactions in respect of that account.
NOTES
v It is necessary to maintain separate accounts as set out in the provisions.
v Petitioner paying certain amount to promoters for constructing building and thereafter delivering one flat to ‘A’---No separate account in bank maintained by promoters in respect of payment made by ‘A’ ---No amount was paid as advance of deposit but sums paid by ‘A’ were only towards purchase price---Section 5 would not be attracted---Held, it could not be said that promoters had committed any breach. Pradeep Bhupatrai Visa v/s Bombay Builders Pvt.Ltd. & others 1987(1) Bom C.R. 327
v charges under—Validity---promoter of building agreeing to construct building and thereafter hand over flat to petitioner---Willful refusal to possession of side fiat to petitioner---promoters selling said flat to other part---Agreement not registered---Held, it could not be side promoter could not be prosecuted on ground that agreement was not registered. Promoter could be charged with offences of criminal breach of trust or cheating or any of offences under Ownership Flat Act.
v where the promoter of the building who agreed to construct the building and thereafter hand over the flat to (A),had refused to deliver possession of in ‘A’ and they sold the flat said flat to ‘B’ in breach of the agreement, it cold not be side that the promoter could not be prosecuted for the offences under sections406,409.420 read with section 34of I.P.C. and section ,3,4,5,9 read with section ,13,14 of Ownership flats Act on the ground that the agreement between promoter ‘A’ was not registered under the Registration Act and since the agreement was not registered had become void and therefore, no party cold claim any right therein .It may be that certain civil rights of the parties under the Agreement which has become void may come to end. The criminal of a party, however, will not be extinguished. A form the entire transaction between the parties. The oral representations made by one party to another or written document besides the Agreement may amount to an offence. In a specific case the of cheating may depend upon the transaction apart from the agreement which remained to be registered. Therefore, it could not side that the promoter could not be charged with the offences of criminal breach of thrush or cheating or any the offences under the Ownership Flats Act. Pradeep Bhupatrai Vava v/s Bombay Builder Pvt. Ltd. &other 1987(1) Bom.C.R.327.
v Offences under---criminal prosecution of promoter---Agreement of sale between him and purchaser---Agreement not reduced to writing and registered under section 4---Held ,where agreement of sale between promoter and purchaser was not reduced to writing and registered under section 4 by promoter, penal liability for breach of section 4,5,7,10 and 11 read with section 13 would flow even in cases where there was no written agreement of sale or where the agreement, of reduced to writing remains unregistered. Abdul Jabber Ibrahim v/s Seiko Builders &other 1985(2) Bom.C.R.274; 1985 (0) Moh.L.R. 419; 1985 (0)Mh.J.L.163
***********
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.