Join us on Facebook
Become a GFWA member

Site Announcements

Invitation to RPS SAVANA Allottees to join Case in NCDRC against RPS Infrastructures Ltd


Have you submitted a rating and reviewed your project?
Rate & Review your project now! Submit your project and review.
Read Reviews! Share your feedback!


** Enhanced EDC Stayed by High Court **

Forum email notifications...Please read !
Carpool from Greater Faridabad to Noida
Carpool from Greater Faridabad to GGN


Advertise with us

Articles from print media

HC: developers can’t overrun green spaces, Says Can’t Deviate From Layout Approved At The Time Of Agreement

Postby anuj_bansal » Sun Nov 14, 2010 12:03 pm

I think this is a very straight forward judgement from the HC. We should also file a case against RPS and should not worry about the delays and all. I feel we have a very strong case.

From Times of India Bangalore dated 12/11/2010, page 12.


HC: developers can’t overrun green spaces
Says Can’t Deviate From Layout Approved At The Time Of Agreement
Shibu Thomas | TNN


Flat owners needn’t dread nasty surprises like builders blocking their view or taking over their gardens by constructing new buildings on their premises. In an order, the Bombay High Court has said developers cannot construct new buildings — not part of the original plan which was disclosed to buyers — unless they take the consent of apartment owners. Justice B R Gavai further held that builders should mandatorily hand over conveyance of the plot to the new housing society within four months of registration.
The verdict brings to a close a decade-old legal tussle between a Kandivli housing society and their builder that witnessed many rounds of litigation going up to the Supreme Court.
“If the promoter wants to make additional construction, which is not a part of the layout placed before the flat-taker at the time of agreement, the consent (of the flat owner) would be necessary,’’ said the judge. Referring to a Supreme Court judgment, the high court said prior consent is not required only in cases where the builder has made full disclosure at the time of signing the agreement about the entire project, including any additional construction. The court restrained the builder, Jayantilal Investments, from constructing a new multi-storey building on the premises of Madhu Vihar Housing Society in Kandivli (west).
The Madhu Vihar project, completed in 1989, consisted of a building with five wings. In 2001, the developers submitted a plan to the BMC for constructing another building on the plot to utilise the additional Floor Space Index (FSI) available with them. The corporation permitted the new plan in 2002, following which the residents rushed to court.
The lawyer for the society said the new plan was totally different from the one promised in the brochure given to the flat buyers. “Various amenities, like children’s play area, sitting area for senior citizens, garden, fountain, parking, which were promised in the brochure and already provided were being taken away under the 2002 plan,’’ said the lawyer.
The court went through the records and agreed that the builder had promised the amenities in the plan shown to the original occupants of the 137 flats and shops. “However, by the layout of 2002, not only is the building sought to be constructed on the area which was to be kept as open, but almost the same number of occupants are likely to be added in the layout, thereby depriving the members of the society the amenities that were already provided,’’ said the judge.
User avatar
anuj_bansal
GFWA Member
GFWA Member
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 11:25 pm
Location: Bangalore

Re: HC: developers can’t overrun green spaces, Says Can’t Deviate From Layout Approved At The Time Of Agreement

Postby dheerajjain » Sun Nov 14, 2010 6:38 pm

Dear All,

Please e-mail this judgement to builders spokespersons' who cite buyers' agreement clauses while replying.

Order is clear "Whatever the layout is placed before buyer in form of company brochure, other marketing materials etc. at the time of signing the agreement can't be altered later without buyers consent"

This makes for a strong case. Just to add, Haryana building laws are just copy and paste of Maharashtra. Hence, that makes it even more stronger.

Regards
Dheeraj
User avatar
dheerajjain
GFWA Member
GFWA Member
 
Posts: 2010
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 4:55 pm
Location: Delhi


Return to News Articles

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests