FAQs on Parking in Co-operative Housing Societies

BARKING FOR PARKING:

J.B.PATEL – JEBY

MAHARASHTRA CHS & RTI UNION

24.05.2013

  1. FAQ ON PARKING:

    1) QUESTION: CAN A MEMBER HOLD PARKING SPACE / STILT IF HE HAS PURCHASED THE SAME?

    ANSWER: Builder has to provide a mandatory parking space to a certain number of flats dependant on the size of every flat as per the provisions of the Development Control Regulations. Parking space is not counted in F.S.I calculation and is the property of the society. Hence, by the same reason and also as IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 2182 OF 2007, Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd .Appellant Vs. Panchali Co-Operative Housing Society Limited., versus Panchali Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, the Builder is NOT entitled to sell you Parking Space outside the FSI consumed which was further confirmed IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2544 OF 2010, Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd. Apellant Vs. Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.

2) QUESTION: WHETHER THE ALLOTMENT OF PARKING SPACES / STILTS SHALL BE MADE BY THE COMMITTEE ON THE BASIS OF ‘ FIRST COME FIRST SERVEDOR UNSOLD AND AVAILABLE PARKING SPACE? 

ANSWER: Builder has no right to sell any car patking space. The reason is when a flat purchaser is purchasing a flat, he is paying certain amount for the common areas and amenities appurtenant to the primises.

The common parking area / stilts is the property of the said society as per the said High Court order and also as per the various provisions of DCR & MOFA Act. But, be advised that this common parking area does not include the parking space that is reserved for each flat as per the provisions of DCR. Hence, this common parking space is the property of the society and the society can allot it on ‘First Come First Serve” basis or in any other manner in accordance to decisions of all the members, within the frame work of the Model Bye-Laws & MCS Act, 1960.

3) QUESTION: WHO OWNS THE CHS PARKING SPACE?

ANSWER:

a) The CHS “Solely” owns the common spaces (Stilt, Open or whatever)

b) The members DO NOT own the common spaces (Stilt, Open or whatever)

c) Allotment of Parking space is a “Administrative function” and the MC as well as General Body are empowered to allot the parking space to its own Registered members

d) Registered members include family members and associate members

e) Tenant’s are Nominal Members and have no rights of a regular member, which includes having no rights of parking of parking in the CHS premises. However, at the discretion of the MC, parking can be an extended as humanitarian facility to the nominal members.

f) Parking area (Stilt, Open or whatever) is not covered under Floor Space Index (FSI) and hence is not saleable, as upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of Nahalchand vs. Panchali CHS.

g) The bye-law provision pertaining to Parking “RIGHTS” is a gross violation of the
various BMC & Fire act rules and has got no force of law, in Court of Law.

4) QUESTION: CAN THE MC REFUSE TO ALLOT PARKING SPACES TO ITS MEMBERS ?

ANSWER:

a) Parking space limitation (numbers) is decided by the Lay-Out-Plan (LOP) as sanctioned by the civic body (like BMC)

b) and under the Development Control rules (DC rules)

c) and under the Fire Act rules

d) The MC is bound not to violate the LOP & DC Rules & Fire Act rules, regarding the way common spaces are to be maintained.

5) QUESTION: WHAT IS THE TYPICAL PARKING CHARGES LEVIED BY CHS?

ANSWER:

a) Parking charges may be determined amongst the GB members, directing the MC to implement the GB directions.

b) Parking “charges”are not equivalent to Parking “penalty” for violations of Parking spaces & usages.

c) Parking charges may be from 10/- to 10,000/- or anything per vehicle, per month, BUT as decided by the GB, BUT this is again applicable “ONLY” to Registered members including his family members and associate members.

d) Nominal member is not a registered member. Hence parking charges do not apply to him. Hence Parking space can be denied to Nominal members, even if parking space is allotted to registered members including his family members and associate members, since Parking space is not a right granted to the registered members.

6) QUESTION: WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTANANCE OF PARKING SPACES?

ANSWER:
a) The MC is responsible for the upkeep & safety of the Parking spaces and for the safety of the members Parked vehicles rwsonable precautions may be taken by MC.

c) The member who parks his vehicle with the permission of the MC and pays Parking charges, can file Civil Cases, Criminal Cases and Consumer Court cases, against the CHS, for any “Negligence & Deficiency” in parking facility, vehicle damages etc….

d) The MC is liable to provide Common area lights, Security services to the CHS common areas, Sweeper charges to the parking area, path-way repair & maintenance etc…

7) QUESTION: CAN PARKING DEPOSIT BE COLLECTED?

ANSWER:

a) Parking space is a Common area and Deposit for Parking space cannot be collected, even if passed by the GB.

b) MCS RULE 39 restricts rights of society to raise funds.

c) Deposit means refundable, interest free, or whatever.

8) QUESTION: HOW TO ALLOT PARKING SPACES?

ANSWER:

a) Depending on the number of lawful Parking spaces (under BMC rules) and number of member vehicles, Parking space may be tentatively allotted on yearly Rotation usage system, which depends on cyclic First Apply First Allotment system.

b) More than one parking space may not be allotted to a member IF other members

parking requirements are not fulfilled.

  • 9) QUESTION: WHAT ABOUT PENALTY ON PARKING OFFENSES? (Open, Stilt or whatever):

    ANSWER:

    a) Penalty in a CHS is a “Fine” for violations of the CHS rules & conditions and Resolutions passed in the GB directing the MC to implement the GB directions applicable to them.

    b) Penalty amount may be fixed and decided by the GB and but levied to a member only after after giving opportunity to the member.

    c) However, by virtue of elections and the MCS Bye-Law no 136 of the old Bye-Laws and MCS Bye-Law no 138 of the new Model Bye Laws read as under “The members of the Committee shall be jointly and severally liable for making good any loss which the society may suffer on account of their negligence or omission to perform any of the duties and functions cast on them under the Act, Rules and Bye-laws of the Society.”

    d) In case of dispute of Penalty amount levied by the MC, the member may approach the local Ward Deputy Registrar / Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Housing Societies, for redressal of his grievances.

    As per New Model Bye Laws (as amended in 2009) Bye Law No.166: The general body meeting, after considering the say of the member and after giving him hearing, may levy penalty at the rate fixed by the meeting of the general body of the society but not more than Rs.1000.

    MOFA, is very clear on a part of parking space, stilt and open to sky. Builders do not have any right to sell these spaces, as per lot of judgments. In spite of Supreme Court judgment, some of the builders are known to sell such spaces for lakhs of rupee. If anybody wants to fight, our litigation system is so lengthy, and expansive. As per D.C. Rule builders have to keep 10% (increased to 25% in some areas) parking space in every building project, reserved for the visitors.


1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO. 2182 OF 2007 Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd .Appellant Vs. Panchali Co-Operative Housing Society Limited. ..Respondent

2) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2544 OF 2010 Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd. Apellant Vs. Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Respondent

Note: The said High Court Order of Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd versus Panchali Co-Operative Housing Society Limited was challenged in the Supreme Court of India and the Hon’ble Supreme Court also upheld the Judgment of the Bombay High Court i.e. “Builder cannot sell parking slots in the stilt area as independent flats or garage”

IF THE BUILDER HAS ALREADY SOLD PARKING SPACE:

Under Section 78 of MOF Act, The allotment of parking space/ stilts shall be made by the Managing Committee on the basis of ‘first come first served’ for unsold and available parking spaces. In a judgment by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission authenticated the Cooperative Housing Societies that they can redistribute parking spaces sold and allotted by the Developer after adopting a suitable bye-law. The Commission ruled that the allotment of parking space is a matter that has be decided by the Housing Society. The Commission’s verdict was delivered on February 21, 2012 while deciding a complaint filed by Thane-based elderly couple. The complainants who had purchased a flat in one of the Housing Societies in Thane, had approached the Commission in May last year after they were physically restrained by employees of the Developer from parking their vehicle in a stilt parking space sold to another flat purchaser in the same Society. The complainants alleged that they were thereafter compelled to park their vehicle outside the Society compound.

The Commission ruled that Managing Committee of the Cooperative Housing Society can now decide fresh parking arrangements by cancelling the allotment of parking spaces made by their Builder by adopting a suitable bye-law. The complainants sought compensation from the Developer for selling parking spaces in breach of provisions of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963. The Developer contended that he had never agreed to sell or allot any parking space to the complainants. The Commission discarded the Developer’s contention, reiterating the settled legal position that the Developer cannot sell or allot any parking space, which forms part of the common amenities of the Housing Society.

IMG-20151006-WA0014

Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India (BRAI) bill stalled again!

We stopped the Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India (BRAI) bill again!

Two months ago thousands of emails from us asked Minister of Science and Technology, Jaipal Reddy to stop the bill. Before that we registered our opposition to genetically modified (GM) food by saying ‘No’ to it in an online poll. Now the bill is being reviewed by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology, Environment and Forests. [1]

The BRAI bill is a ploy to silence the opposition to GM crops and food in our country. [2] If cleared, the bill will create an autocratic body that will allow GM crops in our country without checking for safety. It will decide the future of our food and agriculture without even consulting us.

So far we’ve not allowed the BRAI bill to succeed.[3] There is however a strong group of multinational seed corporations, like Monsanto, and politicians who will benefit from this bill and want it to get through. They will use their influence to get this bill cleared in the next Parliament session.

We’ve defeated them for three years and we’ll keep doing that till our food is safe from genetic modification. The fight is still on. Let’s do what we’ve done in the past and save our food from harmful GM technology.

Thanks!

Neha Saigal

Greenpeace India

Public sector insurer settles claim of Rs 80 lakh

CERS compels public sector insurer to settle claim of Rs 80 lakh previously rejected on invalid grounds

Ahmedabad, June 06 th , 2013

A tactical move by a government-owned general insurer to reject a valid claim of an amount as high as Rs. 80 lakh by making convenient interpretation of the terms & conditions of the insurance policy was blocked by intervention of nationally renowned consumer organization Consumer Education & Research Society (CERS), which filed a case on behalf of a city-based firm in Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gujarat  and got an order in favor of the complainant for the settlement of the claim. The State Commission ordered New India Assurance to pay Rs.80 lakh within 30 days with interest at the rate of 9% and also asked to pay additional amount of Rs. 50,000/- towards the litigation cost and Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for the mental agony faced by the complainant.

As per the case details, Doshion Ltd. providing solutions for water management, received a contract for installation of a desalination plant on turn-key basis from Kerala Minerals Metal Ltd in 2005. As prescribed in the bid document, the company got a standard fire & special perils policy covering risk of Rs. 29.25 crore including cover of Rs. 5 crore for construction materials and other stocks before commencing the work in 2006 from New India Assurance Company Ltd by paying a premium of Rs. 8.08 lakh.

Thereafter, during the progress of the work, the construction site was flooded by the sea water due to breach in a nearby earthen embankment and whole machineries and material mobilized for the work were destroyed. The development was immediately reported to the insurance company. As per the evaluation, the damage was to the tune of about Rs. 80 lakh and Doshion Ltd put up a claim of Rs. 86.93 lakh before the insurer. However, the claim was rejected saying that the site, where the damage was done, was different one from the place cited in the insurance policy.

As the move was illegal, Doshion Ltd approached CERS to intervene. After verifying all the details, CERS filed a complaint in the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad. On behalf  on CERS, Mr. Apurva Dave appeared in the Commission. After hearing both parties through their counsels, the Commission rejected the argument made by New India Assurance company and passed an order in favor of the complainant asking the insurer to suitably compensate.

For further details please contact: Mr Apurva Dave, +91 98255 55854  

Mumbai Roadlogger

Mumbai is the financial capital of India and one of the the worlds largest and fastest growing cities. Yet its roads are in no better condition than the surface of the moon. This application aims to enable Mumbaikars to mail bad road conditions to the relevant authorities and make them aware of the issue. Municipal ward mail ids have been provided as ‘To'(primary) recipient while state & central representative mail IDs have been provided as ‘CC’ (secondary) recipients in case an escalation is required. There is also a facility to post the road conditions to Facebook so you can update friends and family.

Click Here to get this Android app

Lady doctor gets reimbursement for eye surgery from Oriental Insurance

CERS helps a harried lady doctor get reimbursement for eye surgery from Oriental Insurance

Ahmedabad,May 8th , 2013

Consumer Education & Research Society (CERS) once again came to the rescue of a harassed consumer. This time an Ahmedabad-based lady doctor who was denied reimbursement for an eye surgery by her insurance company.

As per the case details, Dr. Diksha Sawant*, a resident of Bopal area of the city, had purchased a health insurance policy from The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd about 20 years ago and it was renewed every year since then. The policy was valid during the period from 16 March, 2009 to 15 March, 2010. Dr. Sawant* had an eye surgery during this period and when she made a claim for reimbursement of the cost, the insurance company rejected it saying that she had only received injections for macular degeneration, which is not an eye surgery and therefore she was not eligible for reimbursement as per the policy terms.

On refusal from the insurance company, Dr Sawant* approached CERS and after verifying the details, CERS filed a complaint before the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Ahmedabad (Additional). CERS also submitted that the administration of injection to Dr. Sawant* is done under local anaesthesia and is a surgical procedure related to Retina and Vitreous surgery. The procedure has to be carried out in an Operation theater. So, it is definitely a type of ‘EYE SURGERY’. And for ‘Eye Surgery’, hospitalisation of 24 hours or more is not necessary for reimbursement of claim as per the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. After hearing both the parties, the forum did not find any merit in the arguments made by the insurance company and accepting the certificate issued by the doctor, who performed the surgery, it ruled the order in favor of the complainant.

The forum has not only ordered the insurance company to reimburse the cost of eye surgery i.e. Rs. 72,029 but also to pay interest @8% on this amount from 22/1/2010 for denying the reimbursement. It has also ordered the insurer to pay Rs. 5,000 towards compensation for mental agony faced by the doctor and Rs. 3,000 towards the litigation cost.

However, the total claim amount was Rs. 1,44,058/- (cost of 2 injections of Rs. 72,029/- each). But through oversight, the Forum granted claim for only one injection. So, the complainant will have to file an Appeal before the State Commission to claim the full amount i.e. Rs. 1,44,058/-.

*Name changed on request

For further information please contact

Ms Pritee Shah (O) 079-27489945/46

Deemed Conveyance and Other Resources

MAHARASHTRA CHS RTI UNION
We encourage housing societies to approach authorities directly to apply for Deemed Conveyance without engaging any professionals at exorbitant fees.

J.B.Patel (Jeby)
Housing Societies’ Activist!
Mobile:9820538570

12._Contact_Numbers_of_District_Deputy_Registrar_and_Competent_Authority_Deemed_Conveyance.PDF

11._Deemed_Conveyance_-_Form_of_Application__Form_No.7_

10._Deemed_Conveyance_-_Form_of_Application_for_Registration_of_Society__Form_No.6_

9._Deemed_Conveyance_-_GR_-_07.12.2012_-_15.12.2012_to_30.06.2013

8._Deemed_Conveyance_-_GR_on_Documents_Required_-_26.11.2012

7._Deemed_Conveyance_-_No_Notice_to_Owners_in__cases_on_Non-Govt_Lands_Maha_GR_-_23.11.2012 6._Notice_Letter_to_Builder_and_Land_Owner_for_Conveyance_Deed__Deemed_Conveyance_Deed_Execution 5._Essential_Documents_Required_for_Deemed_Conveyance_G.R._Dated_25.02.2011

4._Deemed_Conveyance_Requirements_-_Hemant_Agarwal

1._Solutions_to_Conveyance_Problems.doc

 

MAHARASHTRA CHS RTI Union
For FREE membership, write to < gladiator4mc@gmail.com > , < jebypatel@rediffmail.com >

Visit:
Guidance to victimized members of a CHS:
http://tinyurl.com/4-pt-attack-on-corrupt-mg-cmte
Andheri Panchvati CHS Ltd.case study of harassment – 23.05.2013:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4wUjYmxbjtzWUtuZkxSX1lISDg/edit?pli=1
http://www.facebook.com/jebypatel
http://soundcloud.com/jebypatel/90-8-radio-broadcast-housing
For Co-op Socy. Problems : http://tinyurl.com/Co-opSocyProblems
http://tinyurl.com/4RTIForms
http://tinyurl.com/LandmarkCourtOrders
http://tinyurl.com/ImpGRsCirculars
http://tinyurl.com/BldgPropDepts
http://tinyurl.com/RTILandmarkOrders
Website of DDR III: ddr3csmumbai.org
Website of MHADA http://www.mhada.org/
Website of Commissioner for Cooperation and Registrar,
Cooperative Societies (CC & RCS), Maharashtra State, Pune:
https://sahakarayukta.maharashtra.gov.in/SITE/Home/Home.aspx
Website of CIC: www.sic.Maharashtra.gov.in
http://rti.india.gov.in/sitemap.php
Website of Maharashtra Govt.: www.Maharashtra.gov.in
Website of Bombay High Court: http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in/
Website of Prime Ministers office http://www.pmindia.gov.in/
Website of Deemed Conveyance related GRs and Circulars:
http://housing.maharashtra.gov.in
Website for Legal Advice: http://thepracticeoflawjalan.blogspot.in/2012/04/legal-options.html

TDS on Purchase of Immovable Property (Section 194 IA)

1. Section has been inserted w.e.f. 01.06.2013.

2. Deductor & Deductee: Any person (being a transferee) responsible for paying (other than person referred to in section 194LA) to a Resident transferor any sum by way of consideration for transfer of any immovable property (other agricultural land in rural area in India), is liable to deduct the TDS under this section.

3. Time of deduction: At the time of payment or credit to the transferor in the books of transferee, whichever is earlier.

4. Rate of TDS:-

a. In case of PAN of Deductee is available-1%

b. In case of NO PAN of Deductee is available-20%

5. Limit: No TDS is to be deducted when consideration is less than Rs 50, 00,000.

6. Provision of TAN not applicable.

7. Immovable property means any land or building or part of building. Such may be situated in India or may be situated out of India.

——————————————

Click Here to read further views / opinions also

Some more comments are available here