Filter Coffee #017

On houses, UN, and Dasara

🏘 Fools build houses, and the wise live in them

The original British proverb has the words ‘wise men’. I decided to dispense with the gender bias. The proverb was in vogue when people built houses by investing their savings and borrowed from banks only to find that they could not afford to live in them and still be able to pay back the loan with interest, so they ended up letting the house out. The person who became the tenant was considered “wise” as he or she was benefitting from a property built with care, by paying a monthly rent that did not even convert to 2 to 4% return on the investment made in the house by the “fool”!

This idiom seems to have lost its relevance over time. It is all very well to call some “wise” and some “fools”, but in the Indian context owning your first home is considered a social security measure rather than a mere investment. I am not an investment adviser, but I do believe that people sometimes fall prey to peer pressure and overextend themselves trying to own a house, and then spend a considerable amount of money on the interiors, fittings and furnishings. In today's scenario, one should give more consideration towards 'affordable housing' though it is a jargon that may have emanated from the establishment in Delhi.

At the individual level, affordability is a function of the surplus cash i.e., the savings in bank, mutual funds, PF etc., and the ability to top it up with a loan which you can comfortably repay from out of your earnings without having to cut back on your existing lifestyle. This essentially means settling for a smaller place. Idiomatically it would mean “cut your coat according to your cloth” — you cannot have a coat if you don’t have enough cloth to stitch it. 

The family income plays a role here. From my Mumbai days I am familiar with acronyms like DINK(double income no kid) and DISK (double income single kid). It seemed as if affordability was being linked to the kid! I can see the challenge of managing the financial requirements of raising a kid and still be able to repay the loan without both wife and husband earning. Their ability to pool the savings and top it up with a loan seems that much easier. 

But before going ahead with buying a house in joint names, the couple must assess the kind of relationship that they currently enjoy. I can cite the example of a couple whose relationship was under strain and they, particularly the wife, carried on for the sake of the children, but when it became insufferable the wife moved out with the kids and had to live in a rented place! The estranged husband has the place to himself and should be paying a rent for the wife’s portion, right? But unfortunately, it doesn’t happen that way in real life. So my take is that if the relationship is showing signs of strain it is a bad time to jointly invest.

There’s another problem that people face when they own property in joint names. If the husband wants to raise a loan to start a business with the house as a collateral, the wife should resist the move as she has a potential exposure if ever there’s a default and the lender wants to repossess the house. 

I am of course very happy if the husband, while buying a house in his own name, decides to make his wife a joint owner even without her making any contribution, as it would give her a sense of security.

I met this very interesting couple a long time ago who bought in their respective names two adjacent one bedroom apartments and partially dismantled the common wall. Their logic was that they could be on their own if ever they separated (seemed like negative thinking but practical) and if everything went well then they could have two kids and each kid will have one apartment each. My head was reeling with their farsighted logic.

One might think that as a lawyer I think only of the downsides. No, far from it. I look at it this way: if one wants to feel secure owning a house, that security is vulnerable to breach if the property is in joint names too early in the marriage. I would say that there should be a settling-in period and the couple should attain certain maturity of relationship before they commit to each other by having kids and a jointly owned house. Whether it is a love marriage or an arranged marriage the result could be the same. Some believe that a longish dating period before tying the knot may give that confidence that the couple will respect each other and be able to make certain life changing decisions and abide by them. Tathastu!

There are instances of parents gifting their hard earned property only to realise that they are now guests in their own house. Parents, particularly the mother, must realise that owning property in their names has its advantages and they stay relevant to their kith and kin. Economic dependency should not be a self inflicted curse. Giving can always be achieved by leaving a Will.

Dear Readers, I am not disdaining joint ownership nor a parent’s desire to gift property. The house we live in is in our joint names. The point I wish to make is that it should not be an impulsive decision, but something that is well thought through. The new generation have their own perspective on life, on their preferences, and on the concept of “my space” and “your space”. Their differences could become irreconcilable if the relationship is not founded on mutual respect, a greater understanding of each other's likes and dislikes, and attempts at accommodating those differences. Deflecting peer pressure and avoiding existential crises is the root remedy.

A house is brick and mortar but a home is where the heart is and where the mind is at peace. So, go about building your house wisely, without getting fooled by dreams, and make it your home. 

🌐 UN Day

Yesterday marked the 85th anniversary of the establishment of The United Nations Charter (24th October, 1945). Since then, it has played a significant role in promoting peace, harmony and friendship among member nations. However, its relevance is coming under attack particularly by the United States under Trump. The fact that it is entirely dependent on funding by developed countries, particularly the original members of the Security Council i.e., United States, United Kingdom, Russia, France & China, makes it vulnerable. The veto power that these countries have may defeat some of the decisions that the UN would have liked to implement.

India has been a member of the Security Council but that has been just for a two year term — 2010-11. It has been trying to be back on the Council ever since, and has been successful in getting a seat for the two year term, 2021-2022. Unfortunately, though India is quite worthy of a permanent seat, and has the support of the USA, UK, France & Russia, it cannot be done unless the Charter is amended. This, again unfortunately, China opposes with its veto power, given the heightened tensions between the two countries. That said, let us hope the UN is allowed to carry on the good work that it has been doing particularly in the area of human rights.

🎉 Dasara Festival

For me, born and brought up in Mysore, Dasara (as it is celebrated in Karnataka) has a special significance. Before the abolition of the privy purse and before the Maharaja of Mysore was given the title Raja Pramukh, anything that happened in the Royal family was a cause for celebration by the entire town (Mysore was indeed a town but with many horses). I remember one instance vividly, which occurred when I was in primary school. There was a birth in the Royal family and on 100 feet Road, people lined up on either side to receive a ‘pavu’ of sugar (roughly 125gms). The Maharaja of Mysore, Jayachamarajendra Wodeyar had an imposing personality and as kids we looked up to him as our Maharaja. I have seen many palaces in the world but to me none of them match the beauty of Mysore Palace. In school we used to sing an anthem meant for the Royal Kingdom of Mysore. A really beautiful composition penned by the royal court poet Basavappa Shastry in the year 1881. It is a prayer to Goddess Durga, referred to in the anthem as Gowri, seeking her benevolence and blessings on the royal family and in particular the successive Maharajas whose name featured in the last line.

I urge you to click on this link and listen to the anthem and also see the pictures of the royal family.

You can sing along with the lyrics :

Kayou Sri Gowri , karuna lahari
Thoyajaakshi shankareeshwari
Vaimanika bhamaarchitha komalakara paade
Shrimanvitha bhoomaspade kaamitha phalade
Shumbhadima daambhonidhi kumbhaja nibha devi
Jambhahitha sambhavithe shaambhavi shubhavee
Shri jaya chamundi ke Sri Jayachamendra
Naamaankitha bhomeendra lalaamana mudadey

The Dasara exhibition was another added attraction. The giant wheel, as it was referred to, was a great hit with all the kids — except me. I was content nibbling a cotton candy and watching other kids scream.

Every day during those 9 days of festival, they used to fire 21 rounds from the Gun House as the Maharaja ascended the throne. And as if by magic, as soon as he put his foot on the first step of the throne, the entire palace was illuminated and the crowd went into raptures. The Royal procession on Vijayadasami day, with the Wodeyar in the golden palanquin perched atop the elephant, was a sight to behold. As the elephant came into sight there used to be an unrehearsed chorus “Maharaj Ki Jai”. My brother had his law offices on the main Sayaji Rao Road and we had a good view of the king from the balcony. Those were the days!

My good friend Ashvin’s grandfather was the official jeweller to the royal family. He recalls how his grandfather used dress in the regalia prescribed for attending the royal durbar. Ashvin continued this association and interacted with Prince Srikantadatta Narasimharaja Wodeyar for as long as the prince was alive. That’s the closest link I can claim to the royal family.

🧠 Wit always wins over sarcasm

(NOTE: While this story may not be historically true, it’s an amusing one nonetheless)

When Gandhi was studying law at University College, London, a white professor named Peters disliked him intensely and always displayed prejudice and animosity towards him. Also, because Gandhi never lowered his head when addressing him, as he expected, there were always arguments and confrontations. 

One day, Mr. Peters was having lunch at the dining room of the University and Gandhi came along with his tray and sat next to the professor. The professor said, "Mr. Gandhi, you do not understand. A pig and a bird do not sit together to eat."

Gandhi looked at him as a parent would a rude child and calmly replied, "You do not worry professor. I'll fly away," and he went and sat at another table. Mr. Peters, reddened with rage, decided to take revenge on the next test paper, but Gandhi responded brilliantly to all questions. 

Mr. Peters, unhappy and frustrated, asked him the following question. "Mr. Gandhi, if you were walking down the street and found a package and within was a bag of wisdom and another bag with a lot of money, which one would you take?" 

Without hesitating, Gandhi responded, "The one with the money, of course."

Mr. Peters, smiling sarcastically, said, "I, in your place, would have taken wisdom."

Gandhi shrugged indifferently and responded, "Each one takes what he doesn't have." 

Mr. Peters, by this time was beside himself and so great was his anger that he wrote on Gandhi's exam sheet the word "idiot" and gave it to Gandhi. 

Gandhi stood up, went to the professor and said to him in a dignified polite tone, "Mr. Peters, you signed my exam sheet, but you did not give me the grade." 

That’s it for now dear readers, see you next week. Stay well and stay safe.