
Consumer Panel Points To Deficient Service, Unfair Practice
In a 26-yearold battle for a parking slot, holding a Goregaon housing society guilty of deficiency in service for violating the “one member, one parking” rule, the state consumer commission directed it to cancel all allotments of car parking spaces that were “sold” or “allotted” by the builder and provide a slot to flat owners who were unfairly denied space for years.
“A society is welfare oriented body and has a statutory obligation to ensure that cornmon amenities like parking are distributed equitably Providing multiple slots to certain members while forcing others to park on the road leading to foreseeable risks and damages is the very definition of an inadequate and deficient service,” said the com mission.
The housing society, Dheeraj Valley Building No 3 CHS, was ordered to pay Rs 1 lakh as compensation for mental agony and Rs25,000 towards litigation costs to complainants KT Thomas and Sajita Thomas. “The opposite party is directéd to formulate a fresh parking policy within four months from the date of this order, strictly in accordance with Model Bye-laws… and allot one car parking space to the complainants on priority,” said the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on May 12.
The flat ownets were forced to park their car on the road outside the premises, where a tree subsequently fell on their four wheeler in 2016, causing significant damage. The commission observed that “deficiency in service is clearly established when a co-operative housing society fails to perform its fundamental duties as prescribed by its own byelaws and the settled law of the land”.
The complainants moved the commission in 2020 after the society management continuously failed to allocatea parking space. They submitted that as per their knowlede there are 60 car parking spaces, including open and stilt, in the society, and there are 96
flats in the society of which more than 30 do not have a single car. The dispute allegedly escalated when the society passed a resolution during an Annual General Meeting in Sep 2017, validating old parking allotments made by the original builder in perpetuity.
The residents contested this move, writing multiple letters to the management and the local deputy registrar. The society alleged that the complainants never made any oral or written request pmviding vehicle details for allotment of an open or
stilt parking space, and has not produced evidence of any such request. However, the commission noted that the society’s defence regarding the lack of a formal application is a mere technicality used to mask administrative negligence


