Extended portion -porch in closed street
VISHNU
(Querist) 14 November 2011
This query is : Resolved
Sir
1. In a street the Resident A double storey building front gate is on the other side but his house back side room he has door which opens in a blid/closed street. Resident A has extended Porch of his back side first floor room to the closed street.. The next adjacent house to Resident A is resident B's house whose front gate is on the closes street. resident B has renovated his house and now extended side porch of first floor bathroom, which now extented portion is on the top of resident A's house extended porch on the closed street.
Q. Whether extended portion of first floor bathroom porch of resident B Comes above the resident A Porch is legally correct as per MC law.
Q Whether extended first floor room porch of resident A to the side of back side of closed street is valid as per MC Law. The dimension of porch extended by both residents are 2 foot on street.
Q Resident A whose front gate is on other side, but wants to park his car on closed street even though it is his back side.
Pls offer your most valuable comments onthese queries
Thanks
ajay sethi
(Expert) 14 November 2011
lodge a complaint with local muncipal corporation about unauthorised alterations made .
Sankaranarayanan
(Expert) 14 November 2011
yes you follow the advise of mr sethi, just drop a complaint to local municipal office
VISHNU
(Querist) 14 November 2011
sir
warm wishes
I am not satisfied by the answer at all. This reply can be given by an layman to go to mc and drop a letter about the same. It appears that experts are not conversant about MC Haryana by laws to give advise. query open now please.
Sailesh Kumar Shah
(Expert) 14 November 2011
Read Bye-laws of concern development authority and national building code.
It can guide you.
If matter of UP, i will guide you accordingly.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 14 November 2011
I do agree with you vishnu. Expert one by other are engaged only dettoing predecessor expert which is not aim and object of this site even. if one has to say only 'rightly advised' then what is the need of him only for this purpose?
Anyway, now I come to your questions serial-wise as under:
1. Though you have not mentioned height of porch even then it is a closed street and both porches cannot be constructed adjacent so there is no illegality therein if the same is limited only up to 1.5 feet wide (extended outside).
2. Same story is about A and both persons have violated Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 in this regard.
3. As ingress of A is also available from back side by way of his one door in the closed street so there is no illegality if he parks his vehicle in that street similar to other residents.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 14 November 2011
'engaged only dettoing'
dettoing - no dictionary results found
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 14 November 2011
Mr. makkad when you do a thing it is right when others do it is wrong.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 14 November 2011
And Mr. Vishnu!
services of these kinds on limited information
have there own limitations if you are dissatisfied,you are free to look towards others who can keep you satisfied .
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 14 November 2011
Mr. vishnu! why to talk of Haryana, i am not conversant with even any society as from the place i hail is still to understand what these all mean.
I confirmed opinion which i often do of makkad too because i believe that they are people from places where practice goes so about cases.Mr. Sethi is very adept man in the field of law of co operative societies.
If you feel him a lay man it is your unluck.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 14 November 2011
makkad to define what the aim of this site is???
So that idiots like me be guided by wised like him.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 14 November 2011
Only because you are here from three years and i am from only three months does not make you such a senior makkad that you open a war against me.
'if one has to say only 'rightly advised' then what is the need of him only for this purpose?'
Then cause all expelled,you will find your self first in the list.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 15 November 2011
In my opinion confirming any opinion is also an opinion.
Else there should be rule here that no expert would confirm any opinion.He has to post the difference as of necessity.
Three circumstances may appear here:
1]The very Query is such that there can not be two opinion.
2]opinions may vary and experts view may be divided.
3]The query may not be clear for want of proper facts or answer may not be advanced for want of knowledge.
An expert may be in his discretion, in all these situations, either express his separate view
in case of difference or affirm the view given.
Some time it may happen that an expert is not aware on his own about the answer but he finds an answer convincing to him based on his understanding of things and he may accordingly affirm an opinion.
There is really a nuisance expert on this site who labors in some kind of unknown complex;he probes to identify experts and authors of which i was not aware.Topics he used to attend then,i found his opinions relevant and started to assent them,he thought then he can stimulate me as his follower;then all of first he tried to polarize with me by sending a PM to me against an other expert who is very authoritative in his says on succession laws and commands a healthy respect from me ;as i hate such kind of activity, i did not even respond his PM,then
he felt bad and started to tease me unduly for no necessity and in due course he succeeded in polarizing with few more who are political by nature and these things are going on against me deliberately since September while i joined this site on 26th May perhaps.
At the very beginning i was seriously going on attending that much as i could comfortably do in detail but by experience i noticed that those supposing them stars standing in the top list are doing such a business of which i am being now blamed because i too have learned the art of scoring which they had,then why they feel me a man of Nauset origin and them to be Advanced while activity complained of has been learned by me here only.
I did not think here also i shall face such things which now a days is being noticed by me as a rouge in society.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 15 November 2011
mr prabhakar singh you are highly respected on this site . one should ignore these pinpricks and continue advising to best of our abilites . it is not necessary that all experts will agree on each issue .
Shashikant V. Patil
(Expert) 16 November 2011
I agree with Mr. Prabhakar Singh as confirming some experts opinion is not a serious matter as the person who sought the answer will also satisfied more and all experts will also confirmed about the query and answer at large.
Guest
(Expert) 21 November 2011
Dear Vishnu,
Since the street, itself, has not been illegally enclosed by the residents and is for common use, extension up to the admissible length on first or third floor by any resident has no illegality, provided that is used as balcony. Every Municipality or Housing Development Authority has the rules of coumponding of offence to the permissible limits by paying the prescribed penalty in such cases.
However, if any of the extension is closed with brick wall that extension of course is illegal and can be demolished by the MC.
