How to expose Corruption and Bribery ?

York Stiller

Nick, that´s what I meant when I wrote it sounds strange. Maybe a slur, maybe they want to discredit her. However, apparently she messed with people up to every trick, at least that´s my very personal impression.

Nick-H

...Ah... OK. I misunderstood that we both understood the same thing

__________________
.


Just one member of the IndiaMike Mod Team

patti123

I think like any where in the world ,with any court case they will look for dirt on you, so they can shift the blame.

Trouble with Goa is they are all related. i had a friend that was having trouble with her builder in Goa,she went to a advocate who took on her case but then she found out he was a good friend of the builder !

York Stiller

To sue or not to sue, that´s the question. To be afterwards quite another. As for me after reading the "Foreign owned property" threads and following Dellons case here, there is only one constellation left to have my house enregistered in Goa - marriage to an Indian woman or being adopted by one Indian family. But, yet I´m not that desperate to live there.

Dellon

Good answer I shall marry an Indian I wish!

I had an appointment with the RBI enforcement wing in March this year, retrospective is a good thing in some situations, but not this one.

It looks like there are people out there happy to deal in bribery whilst others are victims of it!

Dilliwala

The national TV channels like CNN-IBN and NDTV love this kind of stuff (provided it's newsworthy enough), and they won't sell u out.

Not really relevant, but she may not have much of an accent - she has a typically Goan name.
Alright, I forgot - the first thing a desi acquires on moving to the US is the twang, real or forced!

Very true - standard procedure in Indian courts.
And she may well have a good answer to that in the form of an OCI/PIO card. That wud clearly knock the 'foreigner' argument flat. In any case, she still has rights even then, as long as she's a legal resident of Goa .

machadinha

Like I said, I'm glad to stand corrected. But I think if anything I'm more confused now than before.

I was reading up on some visa details regarding an unrelated question. So, yes, I came across some lengthier employment and studying visas and so on (see e.g. http://mha.nic.in/fore.htm#vp for a very basic overview). But I see nothing to suggest any of those would pertain to your right of permanent stay, or your consequent right of ownership. (Or put differently, it's conceivable I guess you can own, but still not stay indefinitely. I just don't know the details of the latter question, but I thought the one was dependent on the other, at least legally or technically, that is to say once the authorities decide to stop turning a blind eye, which I think by all appearances is what's happening with all those questions related to the subject.)

I assume it's no coincidence that those fiscal rules regarding property (mostly to do with in what country you're supposed to pay your taxes, I believe), and those for a standard tourist visa, are both set at 180 days. (Come to think of it, the explanation for the latter might well be that technically you'd need to start paying your income tax in India if you exceed that.) But beyond that, I see no direct correlation between the two. It doesn't follow that if you manage to exceed that based on this or that provision, this would grant you any rights as such, beyond those immediately covered by that visa. Am I wrong?

In any case, this discussion is better off on the Goa Property thread, indeed, which I frankly don't care too much about, so why do I even bring it up. I'd just like to understand it, it can't be all that hard.

__________________
Reading tips, all picked up at IndiaMike : INDAX's A Comprehensive Guide To India / Dinoj Surendran's Desi Humor / ITHVC on Culture Shock & Travel Health / JetLag Travel Guides For the Undiscerning Traveller / India Travel Links

Nick-H

Whoa! Muddy waters warning!

There are utterly separate rules regarding taxation, immigration and property purchase. They may be related in concept, but they are not related in fact.

There is no permanent right to remain in India for a non-Indian not of Indian origin. No permanent residency, no green card, absolutely no such thing.

Income tax is a bit of a red herring: broadly speaking, if you earn money in India you are subject to Indian taxation on that earning, even if you are here for a week! Paying that tax does not give you any rights or status. Of course, this is an even more complex subject than property ownership, and would require considerable, in-depth understanding of residency and domicile in Indian as well as other-country law. You're right: paying tax here doesn't extend in any way your rights as per your visa. Lots of foreigners have earnings in India.

You're also right that it is somewhat off-topic to the thread!

Whether you're right to say, "... it can't be all that hard." or not, well, that's a moot point!

machadinha

Thanks. I think that's kind of the answer I was looking for. All other considerations unless you meet some other applicable criterion seem to me to be, indeed, moot (if you'll allow me a slight diversion from your own particular sense of mootness ).

Dilliwala

Technically this is correct if u read the letter of the law, but foreign residents who are married to Indian citizens are, in effect, permanent residents. This despite the fact that they have to renew RP/PIO every now and then. It can be argued that renewal is not a right and can be refused, but the fact is that most renewals are actually automatic - no background checks are done before renewal as to whether a foreigner has committed any crime, etc. He/she just pays the fee and that's basically it. The only time FRRO wud refuse renewal is if the govt was intending to deport such a person.
So, although the words "permanent residence" are not used anywhere, effectively one has indefinite residence, "until further notice" if u like. One is not even required to leave the country if the Indian spouse (the basis for the residence status)expires at any point in time.

Nick-H

I think you are absolutely right, and that happy class of, which I am a proud member, are about as secure in our residence as it is possible, short of citizenship, to get.

Maybe it is just my paranoia that makes me remind myself, sometimes, that that which has to be applied for, can, by definition, be refused! I reflect on this on such occasions as feeling like really slagging off some individual politician on the net !

The point about expiry is one that I obviously hope not to have to discover in practice.

The PR stamp applied to a foreign passport by the UK, by the way, is words to the effect of Granted leave to remain in UK indefinitely or until such time as this shall be withdrawn. I forget the exact wording, but it makes the point very firmly that that which has been given can be taken away.

Nick-H

Our non-indian readers may need to be reminded that, in this context, expiry means death.

Indian English. Once, when telling me about her family, somebody told me that her father was late. I assumed that meant he would be along sometime soon, although that struck me as odd, as I didn't think he was expected. A few minutes further into the conversation, I realised that the late Mr X was definately not expected!

Dilliwala

"Expiry" is a good English word!
Just think if I had used the word "expiration" instead.

Sensitive topic I know, so I tried to handle it as delicately as poss (saying death straight out wud be considered uncool by many desis) - it might come up as a question some time, so I thought it relevant to clarify.

That's correct. There is also, if I remember correctly, another stamp which uses the word "permanent/ly". Similar to Germany, where the stamps come in stages - first u are granted leave till a specific date - to be renewed (just like here), then u get the 'indefinite' stamp, and lastly one called something like "residence right/authorisation". I've never understood the difference between the second and third in practical terms, other than that the last one can't/won't be cancelled. Which logically is disputable - a non-citizen CAN be expelled from any country, altho not easily no doubt.
Is there something similar in Britain? F'rinstance, the govt don't like Mohammad al Fayed, refused him citizenship many times, but don't expel him either, I suppose becos their case is not strong enough on that count.