The office bearers of my society had installed an unauthorized restricted entry system with a glass door and charged members for it by adding an amount of Rs. 9000 for each, to the maintenance bills in Feb 2021. Please note the following points in this regard:
1. The amount was charged under the heading "Bldg Major Repair Fund", despite the fact that major repairs of the building had already been completed and the fact that the concerned resolution passed was for collecting the amount for the unauthorized system. Isn't that a fraud? Isn't the resolution null and void as the system is unauthorized?
2. Two of us members refused to pay the amount as the system is unauthorized and is a fire hazard. Therefore, arrears plus interest thereon are being shown in our maintenance bills, ever since.
3. The other member has been falsely accused of damaging the glass door despite the fact that he has vehemently denied it. He has told the society that the door broke by mistake while he was opening it.
4. Prior to the last AGBM, we had written a letter to the Chairman challenging the arrears plus interest, and that the system was unauthorized and hazardous. We had also brought up the matter during the AGBM. In response, a resolution was passed for refunding the amounts collected from members and for waiving the aforesaid arrears and interest. However, the Office Bearers illegally continued the AGBM 2 weeks later, without a formal notice despite the fact that no decision was taken during the AGBM to continue it, and hurriedly prepard the AGBM minutes without including the resolution, and in violation of byelaw 107.
5. During the illegal continuation of the AGBM, a resolution was passed, increasing interest on arrears to 21% from 18%. We are therefore now being charged an interest of 21% on the arrears. I guess this resolution is null and void as the so called continuation of the AGBM was illegal.
6. The society is now under an Authorized Officer to whom we had sent two letters challenging the arrears and interest thereon being charged. Also an enquiry under section 89A is supposed to be conducted by an order from the deputy registrar, solicited by me. No reply has yet been received from the Authorized Officer. On inquiring with the Authorized Officer, he passes the buck to the enquiry officer by claiming that he cannot interfere in the matter since an enquiry is to be held. Please note that the enquiry is not specifically pertaining to this issue.
Please suggest some good remedy that will serve the interests of justice for us, given that spending an amount close to the arrears amount for getting justice, will be counterproductive.
Jagannath S Pawar
Responded 1 month ago