Tuesday, 30 August 2016

Axis Bank's Threat Letter to RNA Exotica flat-buyers

Mumbai, 30th August, 2016: To recover its Rs 100 crore project loan to RNA Exotica before it becomes a bad debt like BOI's loan and SBI's loan, Axis Bank is pressing the panic-button and threatening flat-buyers to immediately pre-pay large amounts (like Rs 25-50 lakh), forgetting about slab-completion schedules. Axis Bank has recently written strangely worded letters to RNA's Skyline Construction Co in respect of each and every flat (see specimen), saying that unless the entire remaining amount of the flat's consideration is remitted to its designated account, RNA Corp will not be allowed to sell the said flat to the name of the buyer. These letters, which are supposedly "No Objection Certificates" for the sale of flats to the purchasers, are being lovingly forwarded by RNA Corp to the individual flat-buyers with a tiny email (see example). Axis Bank's relayed letter is like holding a gun to the heads of helpless flat-buyers and saying: "Pay everything right now! Or else you will never get your flat!" And RNA Corp's forwarding email seems to suggest, "Yes, forget about installment payments based on slab-completion schedule. Just pay 100% right now".
In fact, Axis Bank's letter has come as a jolt to many buyers who were unaware that their flat was mortgaged by RNA to Axis Bank! Hundreds of RNA Exotica's buyers are suffering from sleepless nights, trying to figure out what course of action will be in their long-term interest. "Should we just pay the remaining amount to Axis Bank, so that it will release the lien over our flats? Or should we continue to pay in installments according to slab completion stages? Or should we go to Consumer Court? Or Civil Court? Or High Court? Or what?!!!" They are at a loss as to what to do next!
Axis Bank's letter has come as a jolt to many buyers who were unaware that their flat was mortgaged by RNA to Axis Bank! Hundreds of RNA Exotica's buyers are suffering from sleepless nights, trying to figure out what course of action will be in their long-term interest. "Should we just pay the remaining amount to Axis Bank, so that it will release the lien over our flats? Or should we continue to pay in installments according to slab completion stages? Or should we go to Consumer Court? Or Civil Court? Or High Court? Or what?!!!" They are at a loss as to what to do next!

[NOTE: In our earlier article titled How RNA Corp taught ExoticArithmentic to Axis Bank, we revealed how Skyline Construction Co mortgaged unsold flats of RNA Exotica in 2011 and 2013 based on hugely inflated and completely unverifiable figures. Axis Bank gave the builder a Rs 75 cr line of credit in March 2011, and beefed it up to Rs 100 crore in March 2013, although the value of the collateral fell sharply.
Also, in RNA Exotica: Nine ways buyers got screwed, we analyzed the negative implications of the sale-purchase agreement.]
Now let us analyze the letter written by Axis Bank, supposedly addressed to Skyline Construction Co., but actually addressed to the flat-buyer directly. The subject line says, "No Objection for Release of Charge for Sale of Flat no. XXX in Building no. B Wing of RNA Exotica in favour of Mr YYY." The letter goes on to say:
  • RNA Exotica has been mortgaged exclusively to Axis Bank for a sanctioned line of credit of Rs 100 crores.
  • The said flat no. XXX is sold/proposed to be sold to Mr. YYY for a total consideration of Rs 1.8 crore (or some such amount), and that "We have been requested to issue our NO Objection for the said sale".
  • "We wish to inform you that we have No Objection for Release of Charge on the said premises to enable you to sell the said premises to said Mr YYY... subject to the specific condition that the total consideration mentioned above shall be deposited in designated account no ABCXYZ maintained with the Bank. Provided that if the Bank is not in receipt of the said sum of Rs 29.26 lakh in the designated amount as aforementioned, this NOC shall not have any effect and shall be deemed to be cancelled... and the charges over the said premises shall not stand released."
No, this is not really a "No Objection" letter; it is actually an Objection letter from Axis Bank to the flat-buyer with whom it really has no direct connection, and as such, it is illegal. As Axis Bank has given a project loan to the builder and not a home-loan to the buyer, it has no business communicating with the home-buyers.
  1. REGISTERING OF SALE-PURCHASE AGREEMENTS MAY BE HELD UP. Home-buyers who already have a registered sale-purchase agreement are slightly more safe. But, for those buyers who only have an Allotment Letter from the builder, this letter implies that they will not be allowed to register their agreement until they have paid 100% of the consideration amount and got an NOC from Axis Bank.
  2. CONFLICTS WITH HOME-LOAN LENDING BANKS. Home buyers who have taken a home-loan from another bank may be in a fix. Their bank will insist on releasing funds only according to slab-completion, and therefore, they will never get Axis Bank's NOC until the final payment is made... and so, they may have to wait till that stage for registering their agreement.
  3. HUGE PRESSURE ON SELF-FINANCED BUYERS. On the other hand, home-buyers who did not take a home-loan may feel under pressure to pay the entire remaining amount of Rs 25 to 50 lakhs, or even more, all at once. Do they have the capacity to pay such amounts immediately?
  4. PAYING 100% NOW MEANS BEING AT THE BUILDER'S MERCY. If home-buyers succumb to the temptation of making 100% payment at this stage, then what financial power do they retain in their hands? After paying 100%, they are totally at the builder's mercy. Currently, construction activity is going on at the 33rd floor slab. Even if one assumes that the building is only 35 floors (and not 40 floors), a huge amount of construction work still remains, namely brick-work, plumbing and drainage, electricals, plastering, flooring, interiors, fixtures, lifts, stairs and common amenities such as clubhouse, etc. etc. At least two more years of work -- or about 50% of the work – is still remaining to be done before the flat-owners can get possession. What if Skyline Construction Co stops work and claims that it has run out of money? What if it demands more money – say another 20 lakh per flat – to complete the project? Going to court may not sound like such a good option then, and flat buyers will be left with no option except to pay whatever the builder asks.
What is the solution to all this? One possible solution could be that flat buyers should pay this amount to Axis Bank, but only after filing a civil case and after RNA Corp gives an undertaking to the court that they will complete the project within a deadline. Groups of flat-buyers are reportedly planning to take some such step, although these discussions are still at a preliminary stage.

Aagey dekhiye, iss dhaaravahik ki Ugly kadee!

Krishnaraj Rao

Sulaiman Bhimani

Monday, 29 August 2016

Judge-cum-Hotelier Indrajit Mahanty of Orissa HC: Is his conduct ethical?

30th August, 2016, Cuttack: Is it OK if our sitting judges become businessmen? If our judges become hoteliers and owners of dance-bars, etc. while serving, can they maintain judge-like attitude? Can they command the respect and awe of Indian citizens, government and various administrative bodies? These aren't hypothetical questions; Justice Indrajit Mahanty, a senior judge of Orissa High Court since 2006, became a hotelier in 2009, the proud owner of the The Triple-C Hotel in Cuttack, which boasts a dance-bar. In his own name and from his own bank accounts, Justice I. Mahanty has taken a Rs. 2.5 crore business loan from State Bank of India for this hotel. Although a private limited company named Latest Generation Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. was formed for managing the hotel, the working capital for the hotel was borrowed by (and is being repaid by) Justice Indrajit Mahanty in his personal capacity. For building the ground-plus-four storey building, Justice I. Mahanty in his own name, sought government permissions and concessions, and he appears to have built in excess of the permissions granted. Justice I. Mahanty self-reported that he acquired the land plot for the Triple-C Hotel in 2009 through a suit in a subordinate court. One wonders whether the subordinate judge and the government officials of Cuttack Development Authority felt pressured by His Lordship. 

Documents uncovered by activist Jayanta Das give reasons for Orissa's people to ask: Does Justice Indrajit Mahanty think like a judge or does he think like a businessman? When His Lordship delivers an interim order or a final judgment, is it a judge-like decision or a business decision? When ministers, government officials and bankers appear before Justice I. Mahanty, do they get the feeling that he owes them many favours? When moneyed businessmen appear before Justice I. Mahanty, do they get the feeling that his orders and judgments can be influenced by splashing money at the Triple-C? Do touts feel free to walk in and out of The Triple-C's hotel rooms, brokering deals and acting as delivery-boys for suitcases of cash? Is The Triple-C Hotel a place for receiving bribes and money-laundering the amounts received? 
These are not just worries for the citizens of Orissa, these are questions that should agitate citizens of every Indian state, because it is quite conceivable that over the next decade, Justice I. Mahanty may be elevated to the Supreme Court judge, or even Chief Justice Of India; if this happens, he may well be hearing your Special Leave Petition or my appeal! Although a relatively young high court judge -- only 55 years old -- Justice I. Mahanty is already number two in seniority at Orissa High Court. Being the son of well-known Barrister Ranjit Mohanty (in whose name there's a large group of institutes spread of eight acres of land in Bhubaneshwar called BRM Institutes), he is influential and well-connected in the legal fraternity. In the next five years, his career track may take him to becoming Chief Justice of Orissa HC, a Supreme Court judge and Chief Justice Of India. If that happens, the people of all Indian states, and not just Orissa, may wonder what role the cash-flows of Triple-C Hotel played in his elevation. One may be forgiven for asking whether his judicial acts are causing the Triple-C Hotel, its directors, and the companies headquartered in that hotel, to prosper?

Does His Lordship recuse himself from hearing cases where conflict of interest with his hotel business arise? It seems not. In 2015, Justice Indrajit Mahanty decided a case about whether dance bars should be permitted in Orissa, and – surprise surprise! The bench headed by him decided that dance bars should be allowed! Triple-C Hotel itself has a dance bar nowadays, earning lakhs of rupees every week, thanks to this judgment. Conflict of interest? Definitely.

Justice I. Mahanty's current bench assignment concerning "Bank Securitization" also is rich with possibilities of conflict of interest, as he is a biggish borrower who owes banks crores of rupees. With so much interdependence with government agencies, banks, etc., where is the question of independence of judiciary?

Look at the documentary evidence unearthed by activist Jayanta Das, with the help of judiciary whistleblowers:
  1. Affidavit filed in April 2007 by Justice Indrajit Mahanty for building permission for a ground-plus-two commercial-cum-residential building: http://tinyurl.com/Justice-I-Mahanty-Affidavit
  2. Cuttack Development Authority permission for ground-plus-two residential-cum-commercial building in July 2007: http://tinyurl.com/Bldg-permission-2-I-Mahanty
  3. CDA concessions granted to Justice Indrajit Mahanty -- permission for stilt-plus-four commercial building without side setbacks of 10 metres, resulting in hotel building almost touching the balcony of the building in the neighbouring plot: http://tinyurl.com/bldg-permission-stilt-plus-4
  4. Photos of ground-plus-four (not stilt-plus-four) hotel built by Justice Indrajit Mahanty, without leaving any space between hotel and another building in adjoining plot: http://tinyurl.com/The-Triple-C-Hotel-photos
  5. Working-capital loans (SME category) of Rs 2.5 cr sanctioned by SBI in February 2009 in the name of Justice Indrajit Mahanty, owner of the "Hotel Complex, Address: Plot no. 280/1038 and 280/1558, Buxibazar, opposite to Pantha Nivas", under the SME segment: http://tinyurl.com/SBI-Loans-2-Justice-I-Mahanty
  6. Debit-credit of lakhs of rupees per month of two working-capital loan accounts of Justice Indrajit Mahanty during the period March 2013 to May 2015: http://tinyurl.com/Justice-I-Mahanty-loans
  7. Judgment of Justice Indrajit Mahanty in December 2015, allowing bar dance performances in hotels: http://tinyurl.com/Orissa-Dance-Bars-Verdict
  8. Report of the bar dancer's judgment in Orissa Post: http://www.orissapost.com/bar-dancers-get-hc-nod/
  9. Recent mobile-video of dance bar performance at 5th floor of The Triple-C Hotel, showing that Justice Indrajit Mahanty's hotel directly benefitted from his judgment: http://tinyurl.com/The-Triple-C-Hotel-Bar-Dancers

Based on the above-mentioned documents (which can all be downloaded from http://tinyurl.com/Jayanta-Das-Judiciary), is there any doubt that the functioning of Justice Indrajit Mahanty as a judge is being compromised by the demands of becoming and being a hotelier?


A) Did the Indian Constitution ever envisage that a judge could hold an "office of profit", much less become a private businessman? If Justice Indrajit Mahanty can be a hotelier, which constitutional provision prevents the entire puisne of High Court and Supreme Court judges from becoming builders, wholesalers, shopowners, film producers etc.?

B) Is Justice Indrajit Mahanty showing all the cash receipts of his hotel in his own Income-Tax returns? His hotel would be having an annual turnover of crores of rupees, and much of it would be in cash. Does any Income Tax official have the jurisdiction to summon this judge to his office with his books of account and seek clarifications?

C) There's a saying that "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". If Justice Indrajit Mahanty commits criminal or civil offences in his capacity as hotelier or bank-borrower, how can anybody bring him to justice? Does any judicial forum have the jurisdiction over him? Short of impeachment, it appears that there are no remedies for such a situation! The Chief Justice Of India, the government and the Indian Parliament needs to consider whether such a situation may be allowed to continue.

This story was recently aired by Kamyab TV, an Oriya channel, in the form of a panel discussion wherein activist Jayanta Das, Adv Gyana Ranjan Mahanty and Professor Patnaik discussed the abovementioned ethical questions: https://youtu.be/KAmPWlxvIdA
 (In case you don't understand Oriya, here is a brief translation of the discussion.) 
But this is not a local story, it is a national story, and this discussion need to happen on national media, on social media, and in the public.

[Note: Do you think this post is defamatory or contemptuous? Are we scandalizing the court and reducing people's confidence in the judiciary? I am keenly aware of possible legal consequences of writing this post, but many activist friends like Jayanta Das and myself consider it our sacred duty to do so because – especially in the context of the ongoing Judicial Accountability and the Judicial Appointments controversies – such questions deserve to be debated in the public domain. Also, there are whistleblowers within the judiciary who deserve to be heard by the entire nation, and on their behalf, activists like Jayanta Das and I are quite willing to go out on a limb.]

Krishnaraj Rao


No Rebuttal from Shri Indrajit Mahanty

By email and also by Speedpost, we requested Justice Indrajit Mahanty's vide these three covering letters (accompanying the above draft press release) sent to his "registered office", official residence and also The Triple C Hotel. Speedpost online tracking shows that our letters reached him on the evening of 26th August 2016, giving enough time to respond by post, email or phone.

Till date, there has been no response.

Friday, 12 August 2016

Refugees of Redevelopment: Who Gives a Fuck?

12th August, 2016: In today's mumbai Mirror, there's this frontpage story headlined, "Buyers Hire Rock Climbers to Enter Flats that Builder won't Hand Over". One empathizes with the desperation that triggered a dozen home buyers in Powai's Tej society, a redevelopment project of Shwet Realtors... but their adventurous act is likely to land them into trouble. Yes, this move succeeded in focusing public attention on the plight of the home owners and the defaults of Shwet Realtors in particular, but nevertheless, the police will probably register an FIR for "House Trespass" and related offences against the home-buyers and the rock-climber, and promptly issue arrest warrants. The fact that the redeveloper delayed possession of the flats for years will not cut ice, because the police or magistrate view the builder's actions as a "civil dispute", and the buyers' actions as a "criminal offence". Bottomline: Our system is unsympathetic to thousands of families who are turned into homeless refugees by builders. Nobody gives a fuck when a home-owner and his family members turn into destitutes and sink into poverty after the builder deprives them of their home (or, in case of the investors, their life-savings).

There's another news item in today's TOI headlined "MD, partner of realty firm arrested for delay in handing over flats". It warms the heart to read that Darshan Lalkit Gandhi and his partner Natwarlal Banka of Lok Group were arrested for failing to hand over possession of flats in time. Whenever we read media stories that police registered an FIR against a builder for cheating investors, we feel happy, because it is unusual and gives us a tiny ray of hope. But this headline is of the Man-bites-dog variety. Such news does not change the basic ground reality that hundreds of builders are routinely cheating lakhs of people in redevelopment projects, and are usually not even questioned by the police – forget about trial and punishment. Refugees of redevelopment have negligible hope of getting justice from police or criminal courts. A majority of redevelopment refugees don't even raise their voices to complain, because they know that the system favours builders. Their builder has taken away their control over their own destiny, and is causing grave loss and grievous injury to them, but they cannot complain to anybody. The numbers of such financially-wounded refugees in our cities swells by a few thousand every year, as the economics of the realty sector deteriorates year after year, making many redevelopment projects signed in previous years unviable; but still, the government insists on give preference to the builders' right to make profit and ignore the flat-owners' right to lead a peaceful existence.

How does redevelopment cause grave losses and grievous injury to flat-owners, you may ask. If you really care, then read on:

Thousands of families of redevelopment refugees are living on leave-and-license many years after their house has been demolished, and the builder has long since stopped paying the rent. Thousands of schoolgoing kids, who were once well-to-do and secure have seen their houses demolished in the name of redevelopment, and now they spend their entire teenage and youth years shifting from one tiny rented house to another. Many such child-refugees reach their late twenties and thirties without getting married, waiting for possession of their house. The marriage prospects of male redevelopment refugees are spoiled as few young women want to marrying into a family that shifts residence every 11 months. Child-refugees of redevelopment experience redevelopment as a curse that robbed them of their childhood and youth... and yet, even after hurting them and their families so badly, the builders are unreachable, unaccountable and unanswerable. Police won't even register a case under MOFA against such builders, despite the recent circular issued on 1st July 2016, because these people have not paid any money to the builder; they have only turned over their entire house to him.

Thousands of pensioners' houses have been demolished in the name of redevelopment although they didn't want a new or larger flat; they just wanted to spend their sunset years in peace and security in their own houses. But they were hounded out of their own houses by their housing society office-bearers, eager for the rewards of redevelopment. Such pensioners are living with relatives, languishing in distant old-age homes or shifting from one leave-and-license flat to another, wondering when all this will end. For elderly redevelopment refugees, redevelopment is a curse that robs them of their peaceful old age. Many will die as destitutes or in abject poverty.

For many families, redevelopment only means forcible eviction from (and destruction of) the house that they have, without necessarily replacing it with another house!
 Why are thousands of redevelopment refugees keeping quiet? Why aren't they coming out on the roads? Why aren't they all going to the police, or to magistrates, or marching to Mantralaya in large numbers? There are many reasons for their helpless silence.

Reason # 1: "We ourselves signed and agreed to this builder! Now how to oppose him?"
Flat-owners were made to sign on society's resolutions, minutes of meetings, consent forms, agreements and power-of-attorney that gives the builder the legal powers to dispossess them of their property. They repeatedly signed, without proper knowledge, various documents with clauses (such as arbitraton clauses) that systematically deprived them of their right to legal recourse. Today, these people feel that by giving all these signatures, they have "cut off their hands and given them to the builder and/or to their society's office bearers". They are convinced that they have no legal rights... and the fact is, they may not be far from the truth! The government and the judiciary assumes that if so many adult and sane persons sign so many documents one after another, relinquishing control over their property worth crores, they must know what they are doing! How can anybody explain to government and judiciary that a society's general body has the collective IQ of a kindergarten child, and the cunning builder-PMC-office-bearers nexus hypnotizes them into making horribly bad financial decisions without a second glance?

Reason # 2: "Flat belongs to cooperative society, so general body & managing committee have decided to redevelop."
According to law, you are not the owner of your own flat, because the real owner of the flats is the cooperative society i.e. the general body represented by the elected managing committee. You can enjoy using the flat as a members of the society. This fiction of collective ownership, combined with the sheepish nature of most general body members, enables the chairman and secretary to abuse their position and lead the society to the slaughterhouse, no questions asked! The few who raise their voices and ask questions are silenced by using the power of the sheepish majority. Experienced PMCs (Project Management Consultants) show the office-bearers how to do this in a ruthlessly systematic way.

Reason # 3: "Redevelopment is NOT a cooperative activity, because redevelopment is not one of the objects of the housing society."
Strange as it may sound, the cooperation department, cooperative courts, etc. have no jurisdiction over the activity of redevelopment, because the object of your housing society is the routine maintenance of the society premises, and not its reconstruction. So, if your society has gone in for redevelopment, you are in a kind of no-man's land where the competent jurisdiction is a grey area.

Reason # 4: "You, the flat owner, are NOT a party to Redevelopment Agreement. Only the society (i.e. office-bearers) will be entertained by court; not individual flat owners like you."
The individual flat owner or a group of owners aggrieved with the redevelopment builder, have little or no locus standi in any legal forum. Unless the society office-bearers decide to go to court against the builder, the individual flat-owners find their hands tied. (This is in direct contradiction with the legal position that redevelopment is not a cooperative activity, mentioned in reason # 3). The common experience is that office-bearers follow a policy of see-no-evil, hear-no-evil and speak-no-evil when it it comes to the builder; no amount of efforts by the dissidents can make the office-bearers enforce the builder's legal obligations to the society.

Reason # 5: "Police avoids seeing redevelopment grievances as cheating and fraud (i.e. IPC offences), and prefers to see it as a civil dispute (i.e. breach of contract), or cooperative matter (i.e. failure of office-bearers to perform their duties)."
Redevelopment grievances are a combination of abuse of Cooperative Law, Civil Law (such as Indian Contract Act), Consumer Law and Criminal Law. It is very difficult for flat-owners to get grievance redressal if the police refuses to act on the Criminal Law part, i.e. offences under Indian Penal Code such as fraud, cheating, breach of confidence and forgery. Unfortunately, that is exactly what happens in 95 percent of the cases. Complainants are discouraged and disregarded by the police. The police is happy to pretend that stalled redevelopment projects and other kinds of redevelopment frauds are a civil matter, to be taken up before civil courts, consumer courts – anywhere except the criminal justice system. So, getting an FIR registered against the builders' systematic fraud is the most difficult thing in the world. The cop who is supposed to listen to you and take down your complaint – usually a Police Sub-Inspector (PSI) or Assistant Police Inspector (API) – usually wants to browbeat and bamboozle you, threaten you, question your intentions, and sidetrack you with irrelevant questions and indirect accusations. In the end, the police will bluntly refuse to register a criminal complaint. They will simply say that preliminary enquiry reveals that this is a "civil matter" i.e. a dispute between two parties. So, go take your grievances elsewhere.

Reason # 6: "General body members hate to admit that they have selected the wrong builder."
Most people hate to admit that they have been fooled. They prefer to believe that if they keep quiet and have faith in the judgment of the majority, everything will be all right. And so the few flat-owners who question and doubt the builder are stonewalled and boycotted by the silent majority of all their neighbours. The continued silence of the majority suits builders. And their silence suits the police, the government, and the judges, who don't want the responsibility of protecting these homeless people. It suits everybody immensely if these homeless people quietly shrivel up in their tiny leave-and-licence houses, recede into poverty and die unnoticed.

Reason # 7: "The home ministry and police does not give a fuck about solving crimes – especially complicated white-collar crimes."
The home ministry and police don't give a flying fuck about fraud. They don't give a fuck about anything but the most obvious crimes such as pickpocketing... and even those crimes, they are not keen on really solving. The police is basically there for bandobasts, nakabandis, crowd management and VIP security, and not for solving people's problems or protecting the public from crime.

Ministers don't give a fuck. Nor does the cooperation department officials. Nor do judges. Nor does the public. Nobody gives a fuck about the lakhs of redevelopment refugees. A majority of the redevelopment refugees themselves don't give a fuck, because they prefer to live in denial and pretend that one day, everything will become miraculously all right if they keep quiet.

About redevelopment refugees, nobody gives a fuck. They are invisible to the system, like pavement dwellers and street children. The system prefers to pretend that they don't exist. And that's the honest truth.

Krishnaraj Rao

Thursday, 4 August 2016

What Muslim Women get in Paradise

Paradise contains 72 virgins for Muslim men, but what about Muslim women?

The Quranic answer: All the pleasures of Paradise such as kinds of food, beautiful scenes, houses, and clothes, will be equally for men and women. The only thing that is for men alone in Paradise is the Hoor (divine maiden or virgin).

Some women may inquire why women are not promised male hoors. The answer seems to be: because women long for adornment and jewels more than they hanker after sexual pleasures!

According to scholar Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, “Allah mentioned the wives of Paradise because men naturally seek them, which is not the case with women. Therefore, Allah did not refer to the husbands of women in Paradise, but this does not mean that they will have no husbands there; rather, they will have human husbands.”

It is specified that a woman who died after marriage will be with her husband in Paradise. A woman whose husband died, and she did not remarry until her death, will also be with her husband in Paradise. A woman whose husband died and she married another one, will be with the last husband... and so on.

Muslim men are inspired to great deeds by the Hadith: “None is made to enter Paradise by Allah Most High except Allah Most High shall marry him to seventy-two wives, two of them from the wide-eyed maidens of Paradise and seventy of them his inheritance from the People of Hellfire, not one of them but her attraction never lags nor his arousal ever wanes.” (Ibn Majah; Ibn Adi’s Kamil; al-Bayhaqi’s al-Ba`th wal-Nushur)

So, an endless orgy of pleasure with 72 maidens awaits the men in paradise. But the earthly wife's heavenly reward is to be with her husband, who is having a good time with these 72 maidens. That will make her very happy, and not the least bit jealous!

Nice, huh?