Builders can’t sell flat’s parking space separately

Mumbai: In a significant order, a consumer forum has ruled that a parking space that comes with a flat cannot be sold by the builder to a party that has not purchased the flat. The forum on Monday, directed Royal Palms (India) Pvt Ltd to pay a Juhubased couple Rs 5 lakh as compensation for not handing over a parking space along  with the flat the couple had purchased in a Goregaon complex in 2006.      "Handing over possession of the parking space along with the flat is binding on the developer," said the Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum.      In the judgment, the forum pointed out to Section 36 of the Development Control Regulations, which states that for a four-wheeler the minimum size of a parking space should be 2.5m-by-5.5m. The regulations also have a chart that specifies the parking spaces to be allotted to flats according to their size and number.      "This proves that a parking space is a part of the flat and not a separate subject from the flat," the forum said. It added that just by handing over possession of the flat a developer cannot say an agreement has been completed.  ROOM & VROOM The consumer forum says:  Parking space is part of the flat and not separate subject from the flat  Developer is bound to hand over possession of parking space along with flat  Section 36 of Development Control Regulations says that for a four-wheeler, minimum size of parking space should be 2.5m x 5.5m Builder took 2 lakh for parking space, says couple  Mumbai: The Mumbai district consumer forum has said that the parking space reserved for a particular flat owner can't be sold by the builder to anyone else. "A developer cannot sell anything other than unsold flats in a building," said the Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. The forum on Monday directed Royal Palms (India) Pvt Ltd to pay a Juhu couple Rs 5 lakh as compensation for not handing over a parking space along with a flat the couple bought in a Goregaon complex in 2006.      According to the couple, Anita Gupta and Anand Gupta, they had purchased a 1,473-square-foot flat in the developer's project at Aarey Milk Colony in 2006. The Guptas paid Rs 57.07 lakh on May 30, 2006 for the flat, which was situated on the sixth floor of the building. The developer was to hand over possession of the flat before March 31, 2007. After the agreement was signed, the Guptas paid the full amount to the developer. On July 5, 2007, the developer asked the family to take possession of the flat to complete the furnishings and other minor work, which the Guptas did.      In the complaint filed before the consumer forum on November 21, 2008, the Guptas alleged that the developer did not hand over a covered parking space along with the flat. They also alleged that all the parking spots were sold to others. They added that they had paid around Rs 2 lakh for the space along with the flat amount, which the builder had accepted.      The developer contested the charges and alleged that the Guptas had filed a false complaint as they had to still pay some dues. The forum, however, observed that the amount due had no relation to the stilt parking. The forum observed that, in the reply to the complaint, the builder did not mention whether it had handed over the parking space to the Guptas. The forum further pointed out that the builder had only evasively stated it had not violated any terms and conditions of the agreement. The forum said it was obvious that the Guptas were not given the parking space. The forum held the developer guilty of deficiency in service.