Multiple owners association in a multi-block constellation

To my knowledge, in the given facts, Kerala Apartment Owners Association Act, 1953 and Rules made thereunder is applicable.

Separate residential association for each block will be a better idea for all practical issues and benefit of members of each block accordingly.

Thank you for the feedback. As there is a difference in opinion among two groups one supporting forming single association and the other supporting forming multiple association, I would like to understand if there are any legal constraints for either models keeping convenience, ease of operations etc. aside.

For e.g. the group supporting multiple association claims that owners of block A have only undivided share on the land where block A stand and the common area. Therefore it is legally not valid to create a by-law giving them rights (maintanence, upkeeping etc.) of land of block B and C. Is this the case?

Forming of an Apartment Owners Association under the provisions of The Kerala Apartment Ownership Act, 1983 read with Kerala Apartment Ownership Rules, 1994 and bye-laws adopted by the association has to be sole (single) association for entire condominium with responsibilities / liabilities to be spelt out and shared block-wise. 

Dear Sir, would you be kind enough to elaborate the reason for "has to be sole (single) association for entire condominium"? Does the law enforce this? If so, a reference to relevant rule would help.

I am interested to understand because quite often we get questions from owners like how could a set of owners of block A question/veto the decisions regarding the maintenance needs of other blocks when they do not have ownership rights on the land of the other blocks? We are currently debating and if we have a legal guideline/reference on the matter, it could help arrive at a common consensus.

Section 3(d) of the Kerala Apartment Owners Act, 1983 provides,

"(d) "Association of Apartment Owners" means all of the apartment owners acting as a group in accordance with the bye-laws and the declaration:"

The Act further enunciates in the same provision,

(e) "building" means a building containing two or more apartments and comprising a part of the property;
(f) "bye-laws" means the bye-laws of the Association of Apartment Owners;
(g) "Common areas and facilities" unless otherwise provided in the declaration or lawful amendments thereto, mean-
(i) the land on which the building is located;
(ii) the foundations, columns, girders, beams, supports mainwalls, roofs, halls, corridors, lobbies, stairs, stairways, fire-escapes and entrances and exits of the building;
(iii) the basements, cellars, yards, gardens, parking areas and storage spaces;
(iv) the premises for the lodging of persons employed for the management of the property;
(v) installations of central services, such as power, light, gas, hot and cold water, heating, refrigeration, air conditioning and incinerating;
(vi) elevators, tanks pumps, motors, fans, compressors, ducts and in general all apparatus and installations existing for common use;
(vii) such community and commercial facilities as may be provided or in the declaration;
and
(viii) all other parts of the property necessary or convenient to its existence, maintenance and safety, or normally in common use.

I hope it clears the clouds. 

"Unlike typical residential projects, here the undivided share of land is already split into four titles. Each block has an own undivided share enjoyed by 100 apartments in the block. The common area is shared among all 300 apartments. Hence four titles."

The above aspect needs to be examined based on the conveyance deeds and issues discussed.

Please note that each State has laid down its own norms.

Thank you Vashista Sir for sharing the extract and also thank you Venu Sir for highlighting the core issue.

Section 3(b) of the referenced act reads:

(b)  "apartment  owner"  means  the  person  or  persons  owning  an  apartment  and  an 
undivided  interest  in  the  common  areas  and  facilities  in  the  percentage  specified  and 
established  in  the  declaration; 

When I just consider block A and the common area, everything fits perfectly and there is no ambiguity. However when you consider other blocks, then the term "undivided interest" stated above becomes blurred as this interest is already divided. To put it precisely, the percentage of interest of block A apartment owners on the land where blocks B & C stand is 0%, and vice versa. This is where we lack clarity at the moment.

Whether the plot of land where condominium is located is divided into 4 parts (as per title of the plot) or it is on the entire undivided plot of entire land ?

According to me A block cannot form separate association and the association has to be single for all the blocks.

Here is a rough sketch of the property for discussion sake.

The orange plot is common to all owners. As per sale deed; block A owners have undivided share on yellow+common plot, block B owners on green+common plot and block C owners on blue+common plot. The sale deeds does not give rights to the owners of block A on the green and blue plots, and vice versa.

Based on this, I believe the answer to your question would be - the plot of land where condominium is located is divided into 4 parts/titles. This is the source of the dilema. Would you still say it should be one association in such a case?