Once resolution is passed in AGM it is binding upon all members 

you are liable to pay your share for construction and dismantling 

You can file a complaint to the dy registrar. It's illegal such shed can't be constructed in common area

SIr the Job of the RWA is to work for the welfare of the residents and suppose for Example,  if 70% people might have voted yes for the shed, then your vote wont even make a difference.

As far as the construction is concerned, yes they can do that after the voting procedure is over as it is for everyones use.

Yes you are liable to pay but you can always object with the same with the RWA president. 

kindly convince them that you were not asked beofre the construction and you would have said no in the voting procedure.

No. In any case, common area cannot to put to some exclusive use. Any single objection will prevail over majority.

Shed was installed without your consent, so you are not liable to pay but if you were using the shed and every flat member is paying for their share than you also have to pay. If asking from you only than you are liable to pay.

Dear Sir,

However, the RWA may take any step such as construction of shed for benefit of maximum of members but the consent of the affected person was necessary and the same was not done in the present case. Also, no work can be done by RWA to affect someone adversely. You are suggested to strongly oppose the move of RWA of asking payment of construction and dismantling. It may be a trick by RWA to give you threat and let the stand not dismantle. So, you are suggested to be strong that raise that point that such stand has caused damages and you need compensation for the same. 

Dear Sir,

Once you become the member all the resolutions taken with majority are binding upon you. If any illegality is being occurred you have to report to the Deputy Registrar and if necessary matter may be taken to the High Court. It all depends upon understanding between you and management people. If there is little disobedience by single owner then it is normal that they will target such isolated persons and now a days other persons never support you. Money is not the matter so pay them money as alms and purchase the peace in your life. If you want legally fight then hire a good advocate and fight on full time basis.

- As per rule , the Association  shall  frame  rules,  regulations  and  procedures  for its common areas and facilities as well as frame guidelines of restrictions and measures designed to prevent the unreasonable and improper use of facilities and common areas  which  will  interfere  with  the  peaceful  occupation  of  units  by  respective  Owners  / Residents conducive to day to day living environment. 

- Further, no   structure  of   any  kind  whatsoever  temporary  or   permanent  shall  be  erected  or fence/partition  put  up  on  any common  area  that  may  obstruct,  or  impede  free movement in the event of an emergency of any kind. In addition, on the Limited Common Areas adjoining the ground floor flats 

- And Further, every owner/Resident shall fully, and without delay, reimburse the Association for any expenditure in repairing or replacing any damages to the Building including the Common Areas and facilities caused through his/her/their fault. Hence

1. The construction of shed in the Common Area by the RWA is itself is against the rule of Society Act , and further not taking the  consent from the flat owner , whose peaceful life being disturbed is also illegal.

- You can lodge your complaint with the Registrar of Society .

2. Since, the said construction was not carried by your father , and it was constructed against the consent of your fathers , hence this was not causes by the fault of your father. therefore you people are not liable to pay any single amount as per law. 

Good luck and dont forget to rating Positively. 

1. Well, common space can not be encroached unless all the flat owners give consent for this. So on thr basis of majority vote a vommon space can never be converted into parking space. 

2. Since construction of the shed was itself illegal it will have to be dismantled at the earliest. 

3. In that context there is no question of giving contribution towards the shed.

you will have to look at this from a different perspective

when the RWA took the decision, based on majority vote, in which your father was not a participant, the decision so taken became binding on your father as well, as the ultimate result of that decision, was the construction of the shed

now when the RWA has decided to remove the shed, which i assume, is also based on majority decision, in which this time your father presumably is a participant, then such decision binds the other dissenting members also who are in favour of the shed being NOT dismantled and who are in minority

so if the dissenting members as above, who are against removal of the shed, are being also presumably asked to contribute their share, i do not see any reason why your father, should not contribute his share

No RWA or resident can legally make use of the common area which is earmarked for common use and benefit. Construction of the scooter shed is illegal. As such, demanding a share is also illegal. Majority vote shall not count for doing an illegal act.You may issue a legal notice to the RWA highlighting the legal position and refusing payment. 

1. When the construction of shed commenced you could have filed a suit for injunction to stop the construction.

2. Now that shed has been constructed in a common area the court will not demolish it just because people stand there and smoke.

3. There is nothing illegal in the construction of shed by RWA on common area even if it is next to a flat. Only thing has to be seen is whether the quorum as laid in bye laws was met or not.

4. You are not liable to pay anything to them.

1. A shed is a temporary structure and does not require municipal permission, PROVIDED it is not made of Brick & Mortar.

2. All types of legitimate decisions by Majority members, in a General Body meeting, are legal and all absentee members are bound by it.

3. The Same things also happens in the Lok & Rajya Sabha.

Hi

1. Yes the shed can be constructed on the basis of the majority vote without considering any other members vote, only majority is required.

2. No, you are not liable to pay anything to relocate the shed.

Thanks

1. The legality will depend on the collective decision taken by the RWA on the basis of the resolution passed by majority members in a general meeting.

If your father finds this as an obstruction to the enjoyment of his property, then he can issue a legal notice to the RWA to remove the structure which is obstructing the enjoyment of his property.

If there is no response or if the demand made has not been complied then your father can approach court with a suit for mandatory injunction to remove the structure which is obstructing his easement rights. 

2. You can refuse to pay the same and issue a legal notice as suggested, let them do whatever they feel like, you can take recourse of legal action as a further step.

1. Yes it is legal to construct shed in common area based on majority votes because associations Generally works as per majority voting and in this case they have consent of majority members. 

2. As they are understanding your problem and ready to dismantle the shed then it is good for you. 

3. You should pay your share as you are also member of society.

He is liable for full amount

As a matter of fact all these are local issues, ther is no law governing such trivial issues.

Your father can judiciously decide about this, in case of any legal issues, then he can resort to legal action against the society.

Your father cannot deduct any amount payable towards watchman and housekeeping services 

Dear Sir, 

You are suggested to give due justification of non payment of watchman and house keeping and don't pay if you have valid reasons for the same. Out of many options, you may claim damages caused to you due to the construction of shed/stand.  

If you can be more specific then I would like to know, how did they deny the house keeping or maintenance, did they give any written notice to you?

He can subtract the charges even if nothing is there in writing by talking with the RWA explaining your grievance or involving a third person who has a good hold with the RWA.

1. IF proper notice was served to RWA, about lack of Watchman and Housing keeping services as documentary evidences, THEN such amounts for such services are not liable to be paid to RWA and the court too would allow it.

Yes you are liable to pay full amount but try sending them a legal notice and initiate a complaint to the registrar cooperative Societies for getting some rebate on the payment 

No, your father is not liable for payment of the full amount and he is entitled to deduction towards services which were deprived from him.

Past payment not payable for inconvenience faced by you.

Another thought is, since service were concuniosly taken by you, so full amount payable, only interest on this amount can be refuse.

He is liable to pay full

He cannot subtract

It's not that the watchman or housekeeping were working only for your father's apartment 

By default, even if maintenance was not paid by your father, these services were provided

Can it ever be said that a building watchman can provide his services to only those who are paying maintenance and would not be serving those who didn't pay??

If the RWA has not provided security and housekeeping services, it is legally not entitled to maintenance charges during the relevant period. Your father may raise objections on that score.

if resolution passed is binding on all members of the association. 

Once any resolution is passed in a Special General Meeting or in an Annual General Meeting, any such resolution so passed cannot under any circumstances be cancelled and/or even modified before 6 months of its passing or expiring.

your father is liable to pay full amount. 

1. They cannot charge you for the duration for which you were denied watchman and housekeeping services.

2. You can be charged maintenance for what is provided to you, not what is denied.

Your queries are subject to the rukes framed by the RWA. if the majority vote is sufficient then you have to comply. If not then you have a case.

In this case your father stand is correct. Hiw can they even deny basic services to you people for a year!!this is ridiculous.

1) As the said shed is constructed after majority members consented for benefit of majority it is okay.

2) Your father is liable to pay construction and other charges.

The welfare of the occupants is of paramount interest.

If your father is aggrieved and if it causes nuisance, take photos of same and lodge complaint with the police.

Reply to your second query:

Your father cannot subtract the amounts payable to watchman and housekeeping.

He is liable to pay the same.