Been refused a 1 years visa

jackson12

hi, me and my husband are retired and have a 25yr lease on a house in india, we have been going there for 6mths each year for the last 15yrs. Usually we were given a 5 yr visa but the last few yrs we have only managed to get a 1yr visa. this year however, we applied as usual for our 1yr visa and were told that we had been refused as they no longer give a 1 yr visa, we were also told that we were not entitled to apply for a 6mths tourist visa as we have property over there. They told us the only other thing we could do was apply for a 6mths x visa which they would have to send away to be checked out and this could take a month. (our flights are all booked to go in 4wks time)
Could we be refused, and if so what would happen if we were refused this visa, does it mean that we can never apply for another visa, even a tourist visa ever again. Is there any ways of appealing against this?


Really really worried about this!

mridula

I am so sorry to hear this.

__________________
Mridula

Travel Tales from India

Nick-H

I'm sorry too.

All countries change their immigration laws and goalposts, and that is often hard on people, but I don't think they should be treating people like this.

They can do anything they like... but no, being refused a visa does not mean that you cannot re-apply, although you might have to declare the refusal on future applications. There is no appeal process that I know of, and since the outsourcing to VFS, it seems that the visa officials are completely sealed off from the public.

nycank

I am sorry to hear that.

I do not know where (the city/town/zila/taluk) you got the 25 year lease; neither do I know the T&Cs; so YMMV in terms of the options.

I am sorry, but you do not have property - you have a lease. If you have been going to India for the past 15 years, you should have begun to internalize the rules and regulations of the country you spend 6 months a year. Sorry to sound so nooyorka about it. But that is it...

Property laws being what they are in India; Their root legislation was from an earlier era.

If you have a lease agreement documents handy, read what are the penalties. Focus on the sub-let clause; and if all fails, get a competent lawyer for dealing with the property.

Most of Urban Indian municipalities; New York; Chicago and a few others carry mutant rent laws that were gifted by the Raj.

Most Indian Legal Acts are from the pre partition/independence era, conceived and crafted and drafted into Acts. Over time these acts have picked up multiple addendums and rule changes.

Here is one and another

Much of the changes since British India, have been about tweaking and modifying it, since babucrats go about their ways interpreting 30s/40s/50s acts. These above, pertain to outsiders.

All the countries that I have lived more that a few months; I read their local papers daily; followed their local news and politics and got a sense of the place; this over and above, regularly reading the NYT (pre-web era) at the nearest public library if possible.


They have not outright denied you a visa; take whatever visa they give you; and develop a Plan B.


India indeed takes the cake in regulations; but remembers the British trained 'em to be babucrats to handle their paperwork during the Raj;... the beat continues.

__________________
bade bhaisaheb is outsourced

GoanCanuck

The OP appears to have leased the apartment in Goa. Until recently there was a thriving business in Goa in which real estate developers "sold" apartments and bungalows in Goa on 5 year leases which could be rolled into new ones. Although on paper it was a lease the developer charged the freehold price from the purchaser.

Although the purchaser was paying the freehold price the property remained in the name of the developer. Total rip-off and many foreign nationals got duped.

nycank

Oh I have a existential question. But old age wisdom prevents me from asking. It goes into Deriddasque critique of postcolonial backlash

Does anyone know; statistically, by country-of-origin how many British/Portuguese/British-ECHELON/FSU have such properties in Goa ? i.e quazi-legal or whatever the political correct word is ?

I wonder, wrongly so; why so few choose not to settle in the English speaking caribbean ? Great climate, good beaches, surf, everything ....

dzibead

jackson12, you cannot legally have a 25 year lease on a property in India. Foreign nationals who are resident outside India and who are not persons of Indian origin are not allowed to have a lease that exceeds five years. Here's what the Reserve Bank of India website has to say about this:

"Q.6. Can a foreign national of non-Indian origin resident outside India purchase immovable property in India?

A.6. No. A foreign national of non-Indian origin, resident outside India cannot purchase any immovable property in India. But, he/she may take residential accommodation on lease provided the period of lease does not exceed five years. In such cases, there is no requirement of taking any permission of or reporting to Reserve Bank".


This is not to say that such a five-year lease couldn't be renewable, but you certainly aren't guaranteed that is will be extended, so there can't actually be a 25-year contractual commitment on which you can legally rely. As GoanCanuck said, many foreign nationals (mostly from the UK) who thought they were "buying" property in Goa were burned by unscrupulous "sellers" and land developers who convinced them that these purchase or long-term lease transaction were legal. In fact, we have two very, very long discussion threads here on the subject (actually one thread broken into two parts because it was so huge).

Here:

Foreign owned property in Goa, (Part One)

And here:

Foreign owned property in Goa, (part Two)

Enter at your own risk!

In the past, such property "owners" were often issued five-year "X" visas (Entry visas) by Indian consular personnel in the UK, but really, notwithstanding the claim to "own" property in India, most of these visa applicants were not actually entitled to anything but a standard tourist visa, which limits any particular visit to India to 180 days even if the overall duration of the visa is longer. When the Govt of India started to tighten up, as your experience shows, it began issuing shorter visas. We've been hearing that those now being issued to UK citizens have generally been limited to six months, although once in a while somebody reports having been able to get a one-year tourist visa (which still limits each visit to 180 days).

But this is the first time I've heard of anyone being denied a tourist visa, even of six-months' duration, and being told they need to get an "x" visa, on the grounds that they "have property" in India, particularly since you don't really own it anyway. You just have lease. I don't know whether you can start the application process over again without mentioning anything about property (since you do not in fact own it), but this probably would have been the best course of action to begin with. Just be six-month tourists, since you only spend six months a year there anyway.

__________________
"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power." - Abraham Lincoln
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." - Voltaire

Haylo

That is rather odd, everyone is entitled to apply for a tourist visa. Perhaps they meant you would be unlikely to be granted a tourist visa if you did apply.

It is also very unusual for the HCI / Consulate to give specific and detailed reasons for visa refusals. Did this advice come directly for the HCI / Consulate or from VFS?

The bottom line is unfortunately that as I'm sure you know, the Indian government seems to be clamping down on foreigners using tourist visas to live in India for long periods, even part time.

Yes. The blunt truth is that nobody has the right to a visa, even if they satisfy the criteria, and any of us could be refused at any time. Neither does a visa guarantee entry into India, that is up to the individual immigration officer.

No, India does issue visas to people who have been previously refused, though applying again straight away without having any additional evidence is likely to result in a further refusal.

Asmithee, a VFS manager who used to post on here, and who has seen the outcome of a lot of cases said that even if VAF (Visa Applied For / Application Failed) is stamped in your passport, applying again after a period of five years would probably result in success, and several people on here with VAF stamps have reported that they have been given visas only a few years after refusal.

There is no hard and fast rule; if you apply again too early, you could be refused, if you wait too long, you deny yourself a visa for many years.

No.

The good news is that you've at least been given the opportunity to apply for an entry visa, so good luck with that. Let us know how it goes.

__________________
The world is mud-luscious and puddle-wonderful - E.E. Cummings, poet (1894-1962)

nycank

On further reflection, I wonder if the OP ever got to talk to anybody at the actual High Commission ? or was it the OpEd of the VFS folks ?