Society making too much money??? Builders cant sell Parking
Hi all, this is my first post. well i am residing in Andheri-Mumbai. There are around 400 flats in the society with ample amount of parking space for every flat owner. I purchased my flat in early 2000(newly constructed). As i had to leave the country for business I thought I will take the parking from the builder later. by 2004 the society was formed. Now my problem is that I could not get time to take the parking from the builder nor the society. And the current situation is that im left with no parking space .
I inquired at society office and discovered that there are 80 more people facing the same problem!! i.e. no space for their car! i also found out through the security guards that the members have sold 2-3 parking space to each flats! i dont know why they did this but it is surely for money making! Now even if someone wants to buy 1 parking for their flat society doesnt have any space left! they should have atleast allotted the required space for all the flats and then sell the remaining space for additional requirements.
Now please guide me what are the laws for getting my space back? Can i take other 80 flat owners and file a petition in court?
Vardhaman Homes|parking space|Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes
MUMBAI: The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission recently held that a builder has no right to sell stilt parking or open parking, both of which are part of com-mon amenities.
The commission ruled that only the housing society's general body could make the allotment of space to flat occupiers. The commission directed Vardhaman Homes to give an account of Rs 9,045 collected as maintenance and other expenses, and also pay Rs 5,000 as compensation to the complainant, Dilip Joshi, and his wife, Deepa.
The lawyer and his wife had filed a complaint with the commission alleging that Vardhaman Homes had sold parking spaces to some residents of their building in Thane (W). The Joshis said a meeting was convened between flat purchasers and the builder, when the latter was told that such spaces could not be sold under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act. But the builder told the members that there would be no refund, and such rulings should be ignoredas they keep changing everyday.
They said they were obstructed from parking their car in the stilt space already sold to another person in May 2010. The Joshis said that since then they were forced to park their car outside the building premises. They said once 60% flats were sold, the builder had to form a cooperative society, and in this case was illegally trespassing on the society's legal rights.
In the complaint, the Joshis sought accounts of all the money collected as maintenance for a year.
The commission observed that it hoped that the society would take a decision to re-allot stilt and open parking spaces and thus safeguard interests of all flat-purchasers. The commission held that the society should do this irrespective of black and white payments some flat-purchasers may have made to the builder to seek favour for allotment of parking space. "The builder/developer has no right to interfere in the society's affairs; the society and general body are the supreme authorities to decide issues faced by complainants pertaining to open parking and stilt parking space," the commission said.
'Flat buyers don’t have to shell out extra for parking'
'Flat buyers don’t have to shell out extra for parking'
Rebecca Samervel, TNN Dec 8, 2011, 08.19AM IST
'Flat buyers donâ€™t have to shell out extra for parking' - Times Of India
Parking|forum|flat buyer|extra|District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
MUMBAI: Experts have hailed a consumer court's order that developers cannot make a flat owner pay extra for parking place-open and covered-within the complex. According to the forum, parking space is part of the common amenities that buyers are entitled to at no additional cost.
The Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum on December 2 directed Dinshaw Trapinex Builders Private Ltd to allot an open or covered parking space to buyer Firoz Khan at no additional cost. Khan had purchased an 839-ft apartment at Dheeraj Residency in Goregaon (W) in 2003.
The forum stated that the builder would have to pay Khan a compensation of Rs 3 lakh if he was not provided a parking slot. "We hold that the opposite party is guilty of deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice in not making the allotment of the parking space to the Complainant along with flat." The forum based its observations on the provisions in the Development Control Regulations for Greater Bombay, under which a builder has a legal obligation to provide parking spaces when properties are developed. The Regulations state that if the carpet area of a flat exceeds 70 sq ft mts (approximately 753 sq ft), each tenement must have one parking space.
The forum took into consideration provisions of a 2010 SC judgement, which held that parking areas are part of common areas and facilities under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA). It quoted the SC judgment, which held that stilt parking or open parking areas are not sellable independently.
Khan said that he purchased the flat, for Rs 19.5 lakh in 2003, but he was not given parking space. On the contrary, the builder started selling parking spaces to new buyers.
In June 2006 Khan demanded that he be allotted a parking space. The builder denied its liability. Khan alleged breach of provisions of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA), 1963 and Development Control Regulations (DCR), Bombay, 1991. In December 2007 he served a legal notice to the builder asking him to allot a parking space. He approached the forum in 2007.
The builder argued that Khan had only purchased the flat and not the parking space.
MUMBAI: Unscrupulous builders in the city have hit upon a new con to mint big money. These developers, allegedly with the connivance of the BMC's building proposals department, get plans sanctioned for car parking decks on each floor and then sell off the space as part of your apartment.
The practice, which has been in vogue for a few years, has picked up pace of late, especially between Bandra (W) and JVPD. The idea is simple, if downright venal: Say you will allow every flat buyer to take his or her car right up to their flat—be it on the 10th or 15th floor—via a car lift. This reserved parking space is not included in the building's floor space index (FSI) or the total area that the builder is allowed to construct. The builder then surreptitiously sells off this space by amalgamating it with the flat, pocketing crores in the bargain.
"Everyone knows that nobody will take his or her car to the 15th floor. Some corrupt BMC officers are taking Rs 50 lakh for passing the building plans and Rs one crore for issuing the occupation certificate,'' alleged a prominent city developer.
One of the most blatant cases that has come to light is an upcoming 11-storey luxury building on Gulmohar Road in JVPD. The local residents' association dug out plans using the Right to Information Act to unearth, what they claimed, were gross violations. The building proposals department has approved a mind-boggling 386 car parks in this building for just 33 flats.
Besides basement and podium parking, the builder, Praful Satra, has been allowed to construct nine car park decks on each floor of the building, which will have three wings of 11 floors each. JVPD residents and civic activists who are pursuing this case with the BMC and the state government have pointed out that although the carpet area of each flat is shown as roughly 1,500 sq ft in size, the builder has shown a saleable area of 5,000 sq ft. Prospective flat buyers are being told that they have the option of converting this parking space into their living room. When contacted, Satra's staff said he was out of the city and would not be available for the next one week.
Asked to comment on this malpractice, developer Sunil Mantri, president of the Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry, said, "Car parking has to be underground in the basement or at a multi-level. Taking the car higher to your flat does not make sense. I have not seen this in any building abroad. The government should take a decision on this.''
Film-maker and activist Ashoke Pandit, secretary of Gulmohar Area Societies Welfare Group, said, "This is a test case for us. All redevelopment projects in this area are now under our scanner. The BMC has given all sorts of concessions to this project. We are demanding that the officers who gave such sanctions be suspended. The documents moved at lightning speed. Eight different officers signed this particular file in just one day. This is a clear case of corruption.''
Pandit added, "Considering that property prices in JVPD are around Rs 20,000 a sq ft, the builder stands to gain Rs 200 crore just by selling this so-called parking area.''
Architect-activist and JVPD resident P K Das said, "There are three otherbuildings in this locality with the same kind of permissions. The FSI in some of these projects is going upto 6 and 7.'' According to him, the builder is drawing immense benefits from this daylight robbery. "The BMC does not get development fees, the city does not get its due and only the developer profits by selling these areas which are free of FSI,'' he said.