Housing society in Mumbai fined, told it must give resident parking slot
A Chembur housing society that had denied a resident parking space claiming that no slots were available has been asked to pay compensation of Rs 1 lakh to the complainant and allot parking space.
Offering options to Silver Riddhi Siddhi Cooperative Housing Society, the state consumer commission asked it to allot Jyoti and Yashodeep Agrawal a parking slot from the common space on the building premises. “If no common space is available, the society should take a decision to allot car parking space to the complainants by (drawing of) lots on a year-to-year basis,” it added. The Agrawals’ request for a slot was dismissed by the society in 2012.They moved the district consumer forum, which also dismissed their plea in 2013. The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, hearing a battle between a Chembur housing society and a couple over car parking space, has suggested a draw of lots every year to allot slots for cars. The couple had moved the forum in 2014 after the district consumer forum had held that there was no deficiency on the society’s part as the parking spaces had been allotted to flat purchasers by the builder.
The society said that since all parking slots had been allotted to flat buyers, if any space is given to the complainants, it would prejudicially affect the rights of the other flat purchasers. Its advocate said all the parking spaces had been allotted by the builder before 2006, when the residents formed the housing society. The society had approved the list of flat purchasers to whom parking slots had been given. At that time, the Agrawals had not taken any objection.
The commission, refuting the society’s contentions, cited a Supreme Court ruling saying a builder has no authority to sell or allot any common space. Further, it held that when conveyance of land and building is made in the name of society, the common space, including car parking space, goes to the society and it, in turn, has to decide on al lotment.
Though in 2006 the society approved the builder’s allotment, “that decision will not disentitle the complainants from getting a parking space on the premises of the society”, the order said. It added that the carpet area of the flat of the complainants is 88 sq m.As per DC (Development Control) Rules, a flat with a carpet area of more than 70 sq m is entitled to parking space. Hence, the complainants are entitled to a parking space on the premises.
News source: Times Of India