To Dy. General Mang Regional Of, Syndiate Bank Panjn Sub-Reply the Memorendum datd-2008/2017 Ref: YourlaterNo.1S74/ROPAN/PCI2017 Please referto the above cited Memorendum issued to me for allegedly using not good language inthe E-mal sent to Higher Authority: our adverse observations in respect of output & quality ‘of my work also have been communicated therein, In response to the stid memorandum, { have to submit following points for your kind ‘consideration, [At the outst, I beg to disagree withthe contents of this letter and wish to put on record my grievances & sense of injustice on receipt of such a memorandum. Till date, We have not received any letter (Ref-3061/0028/25/NGK dated-16/03/2017) from Legal deparment HO, wherein it has heen directed us to submit opinioniemarks/sygeestion in the light of Suppespe Court Judgments in Suraj Lamp Vs. Stete of Haryana, in spite ofthe fet that, HO ite tiveay issued BC Cireular-372/2011 & 77/2012 on POA after judgement passed by Hon'ble Supieme Court in Suraj Lamp Vs State of Haryana In Regional Office, Panjim Only Legal department is maintining inward register. (Competent Authority cn verify entry if | receive such typeof letter, Entry willbe ther. ‘Therefore question of any reply sent to HO Legal Department doesnot arise ‘As fur as delay in disposal of Legal related isues is concemed, you would agree with me that Tegal issues have their own incacies and even a small mistake can have huge financial repercussions. So it requires a meticulous reading ofthe case with utmost care & due diligence. However, al the cases meant for legal vetting have been completed, Similarly, the other correspondncesissued allocated to me have been disposed of in time & pendency whatsoever is of recent origin would be disposed of soon Finally, as directed by Competent Authority o submit our remarks as sought by HO , Legal department on the issue of acceptance of Power of Attorny in the light of the Judgement of Hon, Supreme Court in Suraj Lamp Vs. State of Haryana. I hereby submit ‘ny opinion remarks as under. eo probIn a Land mark Judgement Suraj Lamp Vs State of Hayana, Hon. Supreme Court has held that * Immovable property can be legally & Lawfuly transferred/conveyed only by & registered deed of conveyance. Transactions ofthe nature of GPA sales of GPA sales or SAGPA/WLL transfers donot convey title & and do not amount to transfer nor ean they bbe recognized oF valid mode of transfer of immoveable property. The Courts will nt treat such transactions as completed or concluded transfers or as conveyances as they neither convey ttle nor ereat any interest in an immoveable property. They cannot be recognized as dea of title, except tothe limited extent of section 3-A ofthe TP Act, As per the Suprme Court of India judgement the fll interfered, ing genuine transactions are not ‘Such as a person giving « GPA to his spose, son, daughter, brothr, sister or a relative t manage his affairs or fo execute a deed of conveyance. ‘A person entering in to development agreement with a Land developer or builder for developing the Land either by forming plots or by constructing apartments, to execute agreements of sale oF conveyance in regard (individual parts of the land or undivided ‘hare in the land relating to apartments in fayour of prospective purchaser. Simitarty in those states wherever execution of such development agreement & power f Attoray are already regulated by Law & subjected to specific stamp duty. espe Sir, in View ofthe above stated facts & circumstances, sincerely request you to provide a fee & enabling works environment toa officer like me wth regular professional & ‘emotional supports that lean contsibute more & more to the betterment & growth of our Bank | herby reiterate my commitment wo the organization and undertake to enhance my competencies & performance under your able guidance. ‘And finally I oquest your good soto drop the aforessid memorandum & close the case sccoeingly A Manager (Law) Regional Offic, Panjim