“Funding faith and…”
On March 1, 2013, the managing committee was informed by honorary secretary PZAM, Zal Cowasji that "further examination of all relevant documents has revealed that the properties known as No. 13 Main Street Mhow and No. 14 Main Street, Mhow are actually one property.” Since both houses were gifted under the same gift deed they would be sold together. "Since the property thus being offered is larger than just 13, Main Street, Mhow, the floor price has been proportionately raised from four crore rupees to Rs 4.6 crores. This is for your information.”
Houses No. 13 and No. 14 were originally one property in Mhow
No advertisement was issued, no prior permission of the Registrar of Public Trusts was taken, documents containing measurements were secreted and a general body meeting was called on March 15, 2013 to alienate two valuable trust properties.
Some of us did not want to be party to such a process and did not attend the meeting after having raised objections in writing.
At this meeting the president PZAM, Cyrus Mancherji, told the general body that Houses No 13 and 14 were actually "one and the same” and had the floor price fixed at Rs 4.6 crores reduced to four crore rupees — the price already offered for 6,000 sq ft. Documents were signed and earnest money accepted.
A map of the properties shows that the two properties actually measure 13,128 sq ft and have independent and different survey numbers.
The Registrar of Public Trusts stayed the sale after I complained.
The property is earning the Anjuman a rent of Rs 30,425 per month and there is still considerable more space that can be rented out. Since the current managing committee took charge three years ago, we have spent Rs 53,440 on it. If we don’t count the money spent on building a partition and clearing weeds from the compound, the maintenance cost in three years is precisely Rs 24,840.
PERVIN JEHANGIR
Trustee, Parsi Zoroastrian Anjuman Mhow
Zal J. Cowasji, honorary secretary of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjuman, Mhow, responds:
Ever since the sale of house No. 13/14 Main Street in Mhow was proposed, its measurement in sq ft has been referred to variously at various times by various people. Emails from Pervin Jehangir and Cmde Aspi Marker state that the respective figures for land and built-up area for House No 13 in sq ft are: 3,740 and 6,436. A letter from Naval J. Cooper states that the approximate figures are 3,600 and 6,500 respectively. The actual figures as per the General Lands Register (GLR) of the Cantonment are 7,135 and 6,460. For House No 14 the respective figures mentioned by Jehangir and Marker are 1,164 and 1,788 whereas the GLR puts them as 298 and 210. The memorandum of understanding (MoU) to be executed with the highest bidder does not reflect any measurement as the properly was offered on "as is, where is” basis.
After having taken unanimous consent of the managing committee, including Jehangir, which fact has been minuted, and the Federation of the Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India (FPZAI), the general body, at its meeting on February 3, 2013 also approved the sale of the property. Seeing the number of encumbrances that were attached to the property, the general body set a reserve price of four crore rupees, and instructed the managing committee to conduct the sale only if the highest offer received was higher than the floor price. Further, modalities for sale were laid out and recorded in the minutes of the meeting.
Jehangir was present at the meeting. She also made many suggestions as to the modalities to be followed for sale of the property, which are recorded in the minutes. Not once did she record her disapproval or denial of the sale. The meeting of the general body at which the tenders were to be opened was scheduled for March 15, 2013, and the MoU referred to above was executed on that date with the bidder with the highest offer, which was higher than the floor price set by the general body.
The general body meeting of March 15, 2013, at which the tenders for sale of the property were to be opened, was perhaps the most important meeting during the tenure of this managing committee, yet Jehangir chose to absent herself from it. We found out later that the reason for her absence was that she had approached the Registrar of Public Trusts/SDM (Sub Divisional Magistrate) on March 5, 2013, 10 days prior to the scheduled general body meeting, and she would have had to disclose to the general body her recent action of denying permission to sell the property in question.
The meeting was conducted in good faith, the sale was awarded to the highest bidder, an MoU was executed between the Anjuman and the buyers, and an amount of Rs 40,00,000 was taken as advance payment. The MoU was signed by three authorized signatories of the Anjuman, one of whom was Tehmton S. Anklesaria, vice president (North Zone), FPZAI. The MoU contained steps to be followed to complete the sale, including applying to the Registrar of Public Trusts/SDM for permission to sell. It was only when the Anjuman filed such an application with the Registrar that we learnt of the action taken by Jehangir. Was this done to disrupt the functioning of the Anjuman, to embarrass the office bearers, the general body, the buyers and the FPZAI?
Once the buyers realized that the Registrar of Public Trusts/SDM had "stayed” the sale due to disruption by one trustee, with no immediate resolution in sight, they applied for cancellation of the MoU and refund of their advance amount, with applicable interest.
This one action taken by Jehangir, which then blocked the possibility of further sales of defunct Anjuman properties, has caused a loss of income to the Anjuman of around Rs 90 lakhs (in interest) during the past year itself. If the Anjuman has been unable in any way to fulfill the "objects of the trust,” it has been solely due to her actions.
It is clear from the information provided that had permission for sale been obtained from the Registrar of Public Trusts/SDM, the sale agreement along with schedule of property would have been executed giving full details as per the records in the GLR; hence Jehangir’s allegation that the managing committee was attempting to sell a property by declaring 6,000 sq ft, when it actually measures 13,000 sq ft, is patently false and malicious. The general body had approved a floor price of four crore rupees on "as is, where is basis,” due to the ongoing legal encumbrances attached to the property, the number of existing tenants and the generally deteriorated condition of the property. It had not arrived at the floor price based on measurements, especially not false measurements, as alleged by Jehangir.
She has written that no advertising was done prior to the sale. Mhow, being a cantonment, is subject to certain restrictions, chief among them being sale of property. While the authorities do sanction mutation of properties once sold, they have in the past issued notices to people advertising sale, not just blocking the sale but also sending notices of "resumption” of the properties. It is precisely to avoid this that the question of advertising was rejected at previous meetings of the Anjuman, including when Behram Masani, Jehangir’s father, was president of the Anjuman, as has been minuted. The curious situation in Mhow is known to all, and the fact that no advertising was done was with the full knowledge and acquiescence of the general body.
Jehangir’s allegation that no prior permission was taken from the Registrar of Public Trusts is patently false. As per the terms of the court sanctioned scheme of management under which we are governed, the steps to be taken towards sale of any property are: unanimous sanction of the managing committee, the FPZAI, the general body and permission of the Registrar of Public Trusts. Having completed the first three steps we called for tenders and scheduled a meeting of the general body with those who had submitted tenders. An MoU was signed with the party making the highest offer and the Anjuman with one of the signatories being vice president (north zone) of FPZAI. The MoU clearly states that the execution of the sale agreement would be dependent on receiving permission from the Registrar of Public Trusts.
This permission was sought immediately thereafter, giving full details of the buyer and price agreed. Had we applied before this stage, the Registrar of Public Trusts would have simply rejected the application for lack of full details of the transaction. Hence, it is wrong for Jehangir to allege that prior permission was not sought. Permission was sought at the exact stage that it was required during the transaction.
These facts show that Jehangir’s actions are male fide. She has tried raising objections with the XI Additional Distric Judge’s Court, Indore, with the Registrar of Public Trusts and the FPZAI when she tried to disrupt their recent annual general meeting. Having failed to get relief from all these bodies, she is now trying her luck with the media.