LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Vitthal (IT Consultant)     18 June 2010

Is there substance in our case ?

I stay in a complex called Kores Nakshatra in Thane. I purchased the flat in Jan-2007. The agreement then suggested that there were to be 15 buildings in the complex & 2 gardens. Even the brochure suggested the same. In 2009 we got to know of the Builder's plans of constructing a new building in one of the gardens. We objected to the municipal corporation not to sanction the plans but eventually his plan got sanctioned. The corporation said that since the builder has constructed two public buildings for the corporation he was given additional TDR\FSI by the corporation. thats how they sanctioned the plans. We filed a case in lower court of Thane for injunction. Which has been rejected by the court today.

I want to know from the learned friends here if there is any substance in our case to go forward for further appeal.

Following points could be of use.

1) The society formation is not yet complete although he has started the process since October 2009.

2) The agreement contains blanket consent for whatever the builder may want to do.

3) His plan are sanctioned by TMC despite our objections.

4) The agreement does not say that its a phase-wise project. Building 16 was not part of the original layout plan.

5) Our Advocate did not come up with strong points during the hearing.

6) The judgement says that since the builder is the owner of the property he holds all rights over his land.

Your suggestions are awaited with curiosity.

Regards

Vitthal Patil



Learning

 3 Replies

Daksh (Student)     18 June 2010

Dear Mr.Vitthal Patil,

Previously I have come to know that in Maharashtra the Government is pleased to repeal the Urban Ceiling Act because of which the builders can have more area at their disposal for construction.

In case the builder has fulfilled the requisites of permission from statutory authority then in that eventuality there is no ground in proceeding with the appeal.

Best Regards

Daksh

Vitthal (IT Consultant)     18 June 2010

I do'nt think it has got anything to do with repealing of ULCA.

We have filed the case on the grounds of a recent judgement by high Court for a Borivali case. (Ganatras Vs Noopur Builders) In that case the court agreed that the builder has the rgiht but the court said its is debatable upto what stage the builder has the right.

As per MOFA the builder must form the society & complete the conveyance process in the specified period. If that period is over (I think its 4 months) the Builder loses his right.

The court was of the opinion that the Builder can not take advantage of his own breaches.

bhagwat patil (Property due diligence 9422773303)     19 June 2010

Go for deemed conveyance.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register