MUMBAI: In a latest judgement, the Thane Extra District Client Disputes Redressal Fee has directed a housing society in Kille Gaothan, Belapur to take again the 13 parking slots within the society premises and re-allot them on 'first come first served foundation', as per adopted bye-laws, after a resident moved the fee searching for a parking slot. The fee additionally directed the society to allot parking heaps in open area as per bye-laws and pay Rs 10,000 in the direction of psychological agony and value of litigation to the complainant.
The society claimed all 13 parking slots have been instantly allotted by the builder at a value of Rs 25,000 every and society had no position in allotment. However the fee stated as per provisions of MOFA (Maharashtra Possession Flats Act), the developer or promoter has no proper to promote parking area; moreover, developer had solely issued allotment letters.
Flat proprietor Ravindra Singh Rawal, who purchased the flat in 2018, claimed a resident, who moved into the society on lease after him, was utilizing a parking area, whereas he was struggling. Rawal, represented by advocate Mithil Sampat, sought allotment of parking slot and compensation for psychological agony.
The Cams Enclave Co-operative Housing Society, represented by advocate Poonam Makhijani, acknowledged 13 parking areas have been allotted by the builder and that complainant is parking his automobile inside advanced however insisting on everlasting allotment for parking.
The fee noticed that within the settlement on the market entered by the complainant, there isn't a point out of any assigned or allotted parking. It acknowledged there are 17 flats within the society, of which allotted parking has been given to 13 flat homeowners by builder. It stated as per provisions of Indian Registration Act,1908 and Part 54 of Switch of Property Act, 1882, if any immovable property having worth of Rs 100 is meant to be offered, the settlement needs to be obligatory registered, and on this case, the developer has solely allotted parking and it can't be handled as sale.
The fee cited an SC ruling that each one frequent areas and amenities belong to members of the society. The developer has no proper to promote these to anybody, therefore the complainant is entitled to get allotted parking.
The order acknowledged that deed of conveyance has been executed by the developer in favour of society and as per MOFA, society is absolute proprietor of constructing. It acknowledged the 13 parking slots allotted by the builder by taking Rs 25,000 is an unlawful, null and void transaction as per MOFA and so they have to be taken again by the society, to make allotments based mostly on 'first come first served' foundation.