CHENNAI: This is with reference to a housing colony under the Central Government Employees Welfare Housing Organisation in Paruthipattu, Avadi, that has many defects. One of the problems that is seemingly unresolvable is that there is leakage in our flat from the house above. It’s a recurring problem in many flats. The house owners are unwilling to repair the flats with the resultant problem only getting worse day by day. The Association is seemingly unable to force the errant house owners to repair it.
The design of the flats is such that the problem per se is easily repairable and from what is understood, the house causing the leakage is using this in many cases to extort money from the flat being constantly damaged. Is there any remedy in law for such situation? And what is the best possible way for a flat owner experiencing this issue to seek legal remedy or a solution?
— Veeti Kat Somasekhar, Chennai
There are many housing colonies built by TNHB also. Similar complaints are received. The only way you can get the things cured is to have the repair work of your upstairs flat done at your expense. There is no other alternative.
I have five questions and they are as follows. Does investigation officer in NDPS Act cases need written authorisation to investigate the case? Can the investigating office act as complainant and, after investigation, file the charge sheet? Can an investigating officer in the course of his investigation act as seizing officer, conduct search and seize documents? What is the difference between Sec 281 and 313 of Cr PC? Can section 281 of Cr PC be conducted instead of Sec 313 of Cr PC? — Rasheed
Your queries 1 to 3 are fully answered by Supreme Court (read: Mohan Lal vs The State Of Punjab reported in 2018 SCC Online SC 97= AIR 2018 (SC) 3853).
In respect of queries no 4 and 5, under Section 281 Cr PC or under Section 313Cr PC is not the evidence of the accused and it cannot be read as part of evidence. The accused has an option to examine himself as a witness. Where the accused does not examine himself as a witness, his statement under Section 281 Cr PC or 313 Cr PC cannot be read as evidence of the accused and it has to be looked into only as an explanation of the incriminating circumstance and not as evidence.