Hello
I am starting this new tread since a number of projects in CR are approaching the final 6 months of completion. Mahagaun recently paid penalty cheques to all the owners in Mascot for any delay .

Dumping ground issue is out of Dundaheda now and this has come in several news papers now .
NH 24 widening is sanctioned and tender is floated.Does any one have any thing to add .

I am an owner in Mahagun mascot project and am an end user. Would like to see a useful flow in information in this thread for the benefit of all .

Happy threading :)
Read more
Reply
8447 Replies
Sort by :Filter by :
  • Completion Certificate

    GDA wakes up to the need for completion certificate Homebuyers in Ghaziabad won’t have to risk their hard-earned investments in projects where building plans have been violated. The Ghaziabad Development Authority’s (GDA’s) advisory to the revenue department makes a completion certificate (a document which ensures that there has been no violation of building plans in a group housing project) now mandatory for registering the property.

    What this means is that if a developer sells an apartment, he cannot get the deal registered at the sub-registrar’s office until he provides a copy of the completion certificate. Earlier, hundreds of homebuyers purchased and registered unauthorised flats under the impression that the registration ensured the legality of a property.

    However, many of them were later sealed by GDA because of violation of building rules. HT Estates, in a November 17, 2012, issue had for the first time highlighted the plight of several homebuyers who had bought unauthorised flats through registered sale deeds and, much to their horror, had their apartments sealed by GDA later.

    “The lack of coordination between GDA and the revenue department led to the problem, but now we have plugged the loophole. A completion certificate is now mandatory for the sale-purchase registration of a flat in Ghaziabad,” says Santosh Kumar Yadav, vice chairman, GDA.

    Yadav also says that GDA has taken steps to stop developers from handing over the flats without the certificate. “There was lack of coordination between GDA and the electricity department, too. The electricity department used to give power connections to apartments which did not have the document.

    Now, however, we have written to the electricity department asking officials not to provide power supply to the defaulters. Obviously, without power, possession of an apartment cannot be offered.”

    Yadav also says that he is moving against errant developers who have sold unauthorised flats. “Most of the building violations in Ghaziabad can be regularised by penalising the developers. We will take several other measures to make the developers fall in line,” he adds.

    The Uttar Pradesh Apartment (Promotion of Construction, Ownership & Maintenance) Act, 2010, which was implemented almost three years ago, already has a provision which says, “An apartment may be transferred by the promoter to any person only after obtaining the completion certificate from the prescribed sanctioned authority concerned as per building by-laws.”

    However, many development authorities, including GDA and Noida, have till now failed to implement the act. Many homebuyers were made aware of the issue only when Alok Kumar, representing the Federation of Apartment Owners’ Association of Ghaziabad, filed a public interest litigation in the Allahabad High Court last year.

    Now, though GDA’s attempt to address a pertinent real estate issue has been welcomed by all, the homebuyers say that unless the authority implements the apartment act in totol and plugs all loopholes, any half-baked measure will further complicate matters.

    “My question is, what will the GDA do if a developer does not take the completion certificate and delays possession? He already takes 95% money from the homebuyers during the several stages of construction and only 5% remains to be paid at the time of possession. Any other delay would mean more suffering for the buyers,” says Ajay Sharma, a sales executive, who bought a flat five years ago in a developer’s project which has still not been delivered.

    The buck does not stop here. There have been cases of completion certificates being granted for builders’ apartments in which building plans have been flouted. “Some such cases in Indirapuram are under litigation. In one, the district magistrate’s report has indicted the GDA for flouting norms to grant completion,” says an RWA member of a society with such apartments, on the condition of anonymity.

    However, the builders’ body, Confederation of Real Estate Developers’ Associations of India (CREDAI) NCR, holds GDA responsible for the homebuyer’s plight. While welcoming GDA’s ‘no completion, no registration’ move, CREDAI NCR makes some suggestions, which according to it, is in the interest of both the buyers and developers.
    Says Anil Kumar Sharma, president, CREDAI NCR, “It’s a very good decision. However, I think GDA should expedite the process of granting completion certificates. The problem is that when a developer applies for the certificate and GDA finds faults in the building plans, it takes months and years to sort out the matter.”

    “GDA’s indecisiveness harms both the buyer and the developer. Unfortunately, buyers get the impression that the delay is on the developers’ part. GDA should impose a penalty for the violation at the time of application for completion, collect the money and immediately grant completion,” suggests Sharma.

    GDA wakes up to the need for completion certificate - Hindustan Times
    Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel
    CommentQuote
  • Dont expect that from him ... check his previous posts on this thread all of them are only Bashing CR ... :)

    Thanks!!
    Pratts
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by pratts
    Dont expect that from him ... check his previous posts on this thread all of them are only Bashing CR ... :)

    Thanks!!
    Pratts

    I know that very well..He was the one who wrote that ki F**** sa A..T..M to hain nahi Cr mein apne aap ko world class kehte hain...

    Shit & all those words are common in all his posts...
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by dkppatiala
    GDA wakes up to the need for completion certificate Homebuyers in Ghaziabad won’t have to risk their hard-earned investments in projects where building plans have been violated. The Ghaziabad Development Authority’s (GDA’s) advisory to the revenue department makes a completion certificate (a document which ensures that there has been no violation of building plans in a group housing project) now mandatory for registering the property.

    What this means is that if a developer sells an apartment, he cannot get the deal registered at the sub-registrar’s office until he provides a copy of the completion certificate. Earlier, hundreds of homebuyers purchased and registered unauthorised flats under the impression that the registration ensured the legality of a property.

    However, many of them were later sealed by GDA because of violation of building rules. HT Estates, in a November 17, 2012, issue had for the first time highlighted the plight of several homebuyers who had bought unauthorised flats through registered sale deeds and, much to their horror, had their apartments sealed by GDA later.

    “The lack of coordination between GDA and the revenue department led to the problem, but now we have plugged the loophole. A completion certificate is now mandatory for the sale-purchase registration of a flat in Ghaziabad,” says Santosh Kumar Yadav, vice chairman, GDA.

    Yadav also says that GDA has taken steps to stop developers from handing over the flats without the certificate. “There was lack of coordination between GDA and the electricity department, too. The electricity department used to give power connections to apartments which did not have the document.

    Now, however, we have written to the electricity department asking officials not to provide power supply to the defaulters. Obviously, without power, possession of an apartment cannot be offered.”

    Yadav also says that he is moving against errant developers who have sold unauthorised flats. “Most of the building violations in Ghaziabad can be regularised by penalising the developers. We will take several other measures to make the developers fall in line,” he adds.

    The Uttar Pradesh Apartment (Promotion of Construction, Ownership & Maintenance) Act, 2010, which was implemented almost three years ago, already has a provision which says, “An apartment may be transferred by the promoter to any person only after obtaining the completion certificate from the prescribed sanctioned authority concerned as per building by-laws.”

    However, many development authorities, including GDA and Noida, have till now failed to implement the act. Many homebuyers were made aware of the issue only when Alok Kumar, representing the Federation of Apartment Owners’ Association of Ghaziabad, filed a public interest litigation in the Allahabad High Court last year.

    Now, though GDA’s attempt to address a pertinent real estate issue has been welcomed by all, the homebuyers say that unless the authority implements the apartment act in totol and plugs all loopholes, any half-baked measure will further complicate matters.

    “My question is, what will the GDA do if a developer does not take the completion certificate and delays possession? He already takes 95% money from the homebuyers during the several stages of construction and only 5% remains to be paid at the time of possession. Any other delay would mean more suffering for the buyers,” says Ajay Sharma, a sales executive, who bought a flat five years ago in a developer’s project which has still not been delivered.

    The buck does not stop here. There have been cases of completion certificates being granted for builders’ apartments in which building plans have been flouted. “Some such cases in Indirapuram are under litigation. In one, the district magistrate’s report has indicted the GDA for flouting norms to grant completion,” says an RWA member of a society with such apartments, on the condition of anonymity.

    However, the builders’ body, Confederation of Real Estate Developers’ Associations of India (CREDAI) NCR, holds GDA responsible for the homebuyer’s plight. While welcoming GDA’s ‘no completion, no registration’ move, CREDAI NCR makes some suggestions, which according to it, is in the interest of both the buyers and developers.
    Says Anil Kumar Sharma, president, CREDAI NCR, “It’s a very good decision. However, I think GDA should expedite the process of granting completion certificates. The problem is that when a developer applies for the certificate and GDA finds faults in the building plans, it takes months and years to sort out the matter.”

    “GDA’s indecisiveness harms both the buyer and the developer. Unfortunately, buyers get the impression that the delay is on the developers’ part. GDA should impose a penalty for the violation at the time of application for completion, collect the money and immediately grant completion,” suggests Sharma.

    GDA wakes up to the need for completion certificate - Hindustan Times
    Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel


    Its must do thing, it it will stop the extortion if innocent buyers.

    However my worry is about illegal floors already sold in crossings....

    1. What is fate of those floors....
    A. If they are not approved what will happen
    B. If they r approved how much extra we have to pay

    2. Larger concern is builder in crossings used material to build say upto 18 floors (base and pillers strength) if now allowed to build upto 25th floor, doesn't it risk the life of all?

    Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by dkppatiala
    I know that very well..He was the one who wrote that ki F**** sa A..T..M to hain nahi Cr mein apne aap ko world class kehte hain...

    Shit & all those words are common in all his posts...


    Bitter truth. Gear up 4 protests yet again. Still useless
    CommentQuote
  • Law on Parking Spaces

    In a 2010 judgment, Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd. v. Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. , the Hon’ble Supreme Court rejected the argument of a real estate development company that they are entitled to sell garages or stilt parking areas as separate flats to owners who intend to use it as parking facilities. A bench of Justices A K Patnaik and R M Lodha, ruled that builders or promoters cannot sell parking areas as independent units or flats as these areas are to be extended as “common areas and facilities” for the owners. Also, the Court said that the developer is only entitled to charge price for the common areas and facilities from each flat purchaser in proportion to the carpet area of the flat.

    Background - General Practice
    As per the general practice in the market, the developer, by the agreement of sale, sells only the ‘flat’ and the purchaser has rights in respect of only the flat and no other portion of the building. This is exactly what had been agreed to between the developer Nahalchand Laloochand Private Limited and the flat purchasers of Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.Each flat purchaser had executed a declaration to the effect that stilt parking spaces/open parking spaces shown in the plan exclusively belong to the promoter and that the Society has no objection to the sale of such spaces by it. However, this was later argued by the Society as being contrary to law and hence, not binding. When the dispute arose, the developer approached the Bombay Civil Court seeking “permanent injunction restraining the Society from encroaching upon, trespassing and/or in any manner disturbing, obstructing or interfering with its possession in respect of 25 parking spaces in the stilt portion of the building”.

    The City Civil Court dismissed the suit. The developer preferred first appeal before the High Court which was also dismissed. The Developer then filed an appeal with the Supreme Court.

    What is a flat ?
    The Court examined the provisions of Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 ("MOFA") to determine whether open or stilt parking spaces can be sold to purchasers separately, because the answer to the question would lie in the basic interpretation of what is a flat. As per Section 2(a-1) of MOFA, "Flat" is defined to mean a separate and self-contained set of premises used or intended to be used for residence, or office, show-room or shop or go down or for carrying on any industry or business (and includes a garage), the premises forming part of a building and includes an apartment.

    Apart from the statutory definition, flat means a set of rooms comprising an individual place of residence within a larger building or a self-contained set of rooms, structurally divided and separately owned or let from the rest of a building, which for the most part consists of other flats separated in like manner. Also, In Stroud's Judicial Dictionary, a reference has been made to the observations of Somervell L.J, in Murgatroyd v. Tresarden and it is stated; the natural meaning of the word `flat' is a separate self-contained dwelling.

    Therefore, for a `flat' to be within the meaning of the definition in Sec. 2 (a-1), it must be a separate unit conforming to the description capable of being used for one of the purposes given in the definition. Separateness of one premises from another premises physically and also in use or intended use for one of the uses specified in the definition clause containing the necessary facilities for self-contained accommodation is sine qua non for a unit being covered by the definition of `flat' occurring in Section 2(a-1).

    Also, the Court has categorically stated that the meaning and significance of the bracketed portion "(and includes a garage)" should be seen in the context given to the word `flat' which is true indication of intent of the legislature. The phrase `and includes a garage' in the bracket does not bring in `garage' by itself within the meaning of word `flat'. If stand alone `garage' was intended by the legislature to be a `flat' within the meaning of Section 2(a-1), that could have been conveyed by use of the expression `or garage' after the word `business' in the same breath as preceding uses. The bracketed phrase is indicative of the legislative intention to include a `garage' as appurtenant or attachment to a flat which satisfies the ingredients of Section 2(a-1).

    Whether stilt parking area is a garage
    It needed to be determined whether stilt parking areas would be counted as garage. The definition of garage is not provided in the MOFA. Hence, English language definitions needed to be looked into. The Oxford English Dictionary explains `garage' as a building for housing a motor vehicle or vehicles or an establishment which sells fuel or which repairs and sells motor vehicles. The Webster Comprehensive Dictionary explains the word `garage' as a building in which motor vehicles are stored and cared for.

    The Development Control Regulations for Greater Bombay, 1991 define two expressions, `garage-private' and `garage-public' in Regulations 2(47) and 2(48) respectively. According to these Regulations, `garage-private' means a building or a portion thereof designed and used for the parking of vehicles and `garage-public' means a building or portion thereof designed other than as a private garage, operated for gain, designed and/or used for repairing, serving, hiring, selling or storing or parking motor-driven or other vehicles.

    The developer had argued that open parking space amounts to a `garage' within the meaning of Section 2(a-1). However, the Court disagreed with this argument and said that a person buying a flat for residence or one of the uses mentioned in Section 2(a-1) will not really think that open to the sky or open space for parking motor vehicles is a garage. “The word `garage' may not have uniform connotation but definitely every space for parking motor vehicles is not a garage. A roofless erection could not be described a garage. What is contemplated by a `garage' in Section 2(a-1) is a place having a roof and walls on three sides. It does not include an unenclosed or uncovered parking space.”

    Hence, the Court stated that while stilt area may be usable as a parking space but for the purposes of MOFA, such portion could not be treated as garage. For the purposes of MOFA, the term `garage' must be considered as would be understood by a flat purchaser and such person would contemplate garage which has a roof and wall on three sides.

    Whether stilt parking spaces are part of common areas and facilities The MOFA does not define common areas and facilities. However, the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970 does define `common areas and facilities' in Section 3(f). The Court, while referring to it, said that just like it is unreasonable that a developer cannot take common passage/lobbies or staircases out of the purview of `common areas and facilities', it is unreasonable to say that parking spaces do not fall under `common areas and facilities'. It is not necessary that all flat purchasers must actually use `common areas and facilities' in its entirety. The relevant test is whether such part of the building is normally in common use.

    Therefore, it was held that MOFA mandates the promoter to describe common areas and facilities in the advertisement as well as the `agreement' with the flat purchaser and if a promoter does not fully disclose the common areas and facilities, he does so at his own peril. Stilt parking spaces would not cease to be part of common areas and facilities merely because the promoter has not described the same as such in the advertisement and agreement with the flat purchaser.

    Also, expressly stating the rights of the developer/promoter, the court said that, “insofar as the promoter is concerned, he is not put to any prejudice financially by treating open parking space/stilt parking space as part of `common areas' since he is entitled to charge price for the common areas and facilities from each flat purchaser in proportion to the carpet area of the flat.” MOFA mandates the promoter to describe `common areas and facilities' in the advertisement as well as the `agreement' with the flat purchaser and the promoter is also required to indicate the price of the flat including the proportionate price of the `common areas and facilities'.

    Conclusion
    Hence, `stilt parking space' is not covered by the term `garage' much less a `flat' and it is part of common areas. The court said that stilt parking space/s being part of common areas, the only right that the promoter has is to charge the cost thereof in proportion to the carpet area of the flat from each flat purchaser. Such stilt parking space being neither a `flat' nor a `garage' within the meaning of under Section 2(a-1) of MOFA, cannot be sold separately.

    In the words of the Court : “The promoter has no right to sell any portion of such building which is not ‘flat’ within the meaning of Section 2(a-1) and the entire land and building has to be conveyed to the organisation; the only right remains with the promoter is to sell unsold flats. It is, thus, clear that the promoter has no right to sell ‘stilt parking spaces’ as these are neither ‘flat’ nor appurtenant or attachment to a ‘flat’.

    Critique
    First and foremost, the judgment has been given in the context of the laws in Maharashtra. The universal applicability of this judgement would come into question if there are different laws in a particular state. For instance, the judgment can be applied to the NCT of Delhi in view of the Delhi Apartment Ownership Act, 1986 but it is uncertain whether it would also apply to the state of Rajasthan, which has no such laws.

    Secondly, it is contemplated that the developers/promoters/builders would now increase the cost of the flats to compensate for the loss that they would suffer by not being able to sell these parking spaces separately. The financial burden on the purchasers would either increase or remain the same, but will not decrease. The Confederation of Real Estate Developers’ Association of India (CREDAI), Pune branch, said though SC has made it categorically clear that “stilt parking/open parking” cannot be sold as it does not fall under the definition of ‘flat’ or ‘garage’, it has also stated that the builder can charge for stilt parking/open parking under common area and facilities separately.

    Thirdly, the entire ruling is based upon the meaning of the word "garage". According to the Hon’ble S.C., the area closed by three sides and above used for parking is a garage. This logic puts stilt area enclosed by less than three sides or not at all enclosed in a different footing than the area covered by three sides.

    However, the positive point is that the developers/promoters/builders cannot retain or sell such parking spaces separately since they are included in the common areas. Parking cannot be given or charged from persons who have not bought a flat in the premises. The purchasers would be able to enjoy the same by paying only an amount proportionate to the carpet area of the flat.
    *****************************
    # Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd. v. Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. , Para 2 # MOFA, Section 2 (a-1) # Concise Oxford English Dictionary (10th Edn., Revised) # P. Ramanatha Aiyar, Advanced Law Lexicon (3rd Edn., 2005) # Stroud's Judicial Dictionary (5th edition, Vol. 2) # Supra 1, Para 29 # Concise Oxford English Dictionary (10th Edition, revised) # Webster Comprehensive Dictionary, International Edition (Vol. 1) # Supra 1, Para 35 # Supra 1, Para 36 # Supra 1, Para 38 # Supra 1, Para 40 # “Allotted parking will have to be bought: builders”, The Indian Express, Sep. 3, 2010

    Law on Parking Spaces
    Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel
    Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel
    Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel
    Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by luvguru
    Bitter truth. Gear up 4 protests yet again. Still useless

    as per you DG should have been a reality by now...

    Why it is not becoming a reality???
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by NotSoSuper
    Its must do thing, it it will stop the extortion if innocent buyers.

    However my worry is about illegal floors already sold in crossings....

    1. What is fate of those floors....
    A. If they are not approved what will happen
    B. If they r approved how much extra we have to pay

    2. Larger concern is builder in crossings used material to build say upto 18 floors (base and pillers strength) if now allowed to build upto 25th floor, doesn't it risk the life of all?

    Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

    Illegal Floors and towers would be pulled down by explosion..

    I also support this..
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by dkppatiala
    Illegal Floors and towers would be pulled down by explosion..

    I also support this..


    Its not so easy and feasible option..... Whats fault of poor buyers..... Who already invested here...

    Secondly pertaining to CR I guess most of societies as per last GDA raids in 2012 declared with majority of illegal upper floors. And few towers and few projects illegal in cr

    Which translates that it will effect whole of CR and if keep them than issues with structural safety of these towers...... Omg.... Lost in shock.



    Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by NotSoSuper
    Its not so easy and feasible option..... Whats fault of poor buyers..... Who already invested here...

    Secondly pertaining to CR I guess most of societies as per last GDA raids in 2012 declared with majority of illegal upper floors. And few towers and few projects illegal in cr

    Which translates that it will effect whole of CR and if keep them than issues with structural safety of these towers...... Omg.... Lost in shock.



    Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

    Structural safety if not taken care illegal towers have no right to stand.pull them down or evict the people.put the corrupt behind bars.we at CR do not want SRS greater faridabad like incident to happen in Crossings and loose precious life.

    GDA please take cognizance of demand of sepulchar.i fully support you sepulchar/jass/ysingh11/shivani/thapa/drvpratap/dkboss/dkpatiala/.you have been our well wisher for so long.i am calling arvind kejriwal to fight for us.
    CommentQuote
  • It would be good if u give decent reply to the queries raised in forum, rather than throwing stones on me and breaking the decorum of forum..... Which unfortunately is commonly seen when someone talks anything about CR with facfs


    May I request a simple reply

    Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by dkppatiala
    Structural safety if not taken care illegal towers have no right to stand.pull them down or evict the people.put the corrupt behind bars.we at CR do not want SRS greater faridabad like incident to happen in Crossings and loose precious life.

    GDA please take cognizance of demand of sepulchar.i fully support you sepulchar/jass/ysingh11/shivani/thapa/drvpratap/dkboss/dkpatiala/.you have been our well wisher for so long.i am calling arvind kejriwal to fight for us.


    I agree its a matter of concern. In fact in greater faridabad as u mentioned by a builder srs, who builds illegal school over parking and school building collapsed... (luckily people escaped) but worry is that it just two stories extra on original plan of 1 story underground parking...... If can affect...... Than I am really worried about structural safety issues...

    Builders with greed make floors and go away..... What is the case when building is originally planned for 18stories and now increased to 25stories (again FARIDABAD game and fraud of gjaziabad) is also well known.... But it will surely affect the end users and fate in case of natural calamities....


    We must take it jointly across ncr..... I know Noida extension is already facing such issue

    Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
    CommentQuote
  • to sosuper and dkpp ji ... i have one question - is completion certificate and occcupation certificate same ?
    can any one provide more details about it ... i just wanted to understand and also others here to know better about it so that no one becomes scapegoats for butchering by builders ...
    CommentQuote
  • nice pic .. (courtesy - crossings website)

    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by jthakar
    to sosuper and dkpp ji ... i have one question - is completion certificate and occcupation certificate same ?
    can any one provide more details about it ... i just wanted to understand and also others here to know better about it so that no one becomes scapegoats for butchering by builders ...


    I guess it's different... OC is given to buildings, however to CR as a whole a completion certificate also applies (which has not been awarded yet)



    Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
    CommentQuote