Bombay High Court
Sandip C Shah vs Pratibha S Shah And 28 Ors on 11 August, 2021
Author: G.S. Patel
Bench: G.S. Patel
27-IA-744-2021-IN-COMS-803-2017.DOC Shephali IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 744 OF 2021 IN COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 803 OF 2017 Sandip C Shah ...Plaintiff Versus Pratibha S Sha & Ors ...Defendants Mr Firoz Bharucha, with Levi rubens, Sushant Arora, Ruchi Magoo & Anshul Rathi, i/b LR & Associates, for the Plaintiff. Mr Anoshak Davar, with Anisha Nair & Gaurav Surayanshi, i/b VIS Legis Law Practice, for Defendants Nos. 1 to 4. Mr Shailesh Poria, with Swapnil Gupte, i/b Economic Laws Practice, for Defendants Nos. 5 to 9.
Mr Vipul Shah, i/ b LC Tolat, for Defendants Nos. 11 and 12.
CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J (Through Video Conferencing) DATED: 11th August 2021 PC:-
SHEPHALI SANJAY 1. Mr Shah for Defendants Nos. 11 and 12 states that he received MORMARE some advice or guidance from societies' consulting architects.Digitally signed by SHEPHALI SANJAY
MORMARE There are some reservations about compliances with the applicable Date: 2021.08.12 10:42:08 +0530 regulations. Mr Shah will need to file a short Affidavit listing the architect's observations. Copies are to be served on the Advocates for the Plaintiffs as also to the other contesting Defendants.Page 1 of 3
11th August 2021 27-IA-744-2021-IN-COMS-803-2017.DOC
2. The societies need copies of architectural drawings in AutoCAD format so that these can be examined accurately. Mr Shah states that there are several other documents that are required and in some specific formats. He will write to the Advocates for the developer and these will be supplied on request.
3. Mr Davar's attorneys for Defendants Nos. 1 to 4 will furnish Mr Shah, Advocate for Defendants Nos. 11 and 12, with the necessary drawings to ensure compliance with the regulations, including fire regulations compliance and car parking provisions. Mr Shah confirms that there are no other issues that are pending as between the societies and the rehab buildings and the developer.
4. As regards the Plaintiff and the free sale purchasers, the societies have a limited role to play. The rehab buildings are complete. The Societies' members are in occupation with Occupation Certificates. I will not permit Mr Shah for the Societies to endlessly expand the scope for the controversy between them and the developer. A limited concern of any Court will be to ensure that the societies' and their members' rights and entitlements have not been compromised (and this includes provisions for car parking spaces and the promised amenities). Once this is done, the societies' involvement ceases and the rest will be between free sale flat purchasers and the developer. The societies are, therefore, not entitled to anything more than what their Development Agreement and Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreements provide. If they have any queries or doubts, these must be restricted to the ambit of the Development Agreement and the Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreements alone. It is for this limited purpose Page 2 of 3 11th August 2021 27-IA-744-2021-IN-COMS-803-2017.DOC that I will keep the matter on 20th August 2021. Beyond that the issue will be between the free sale flat purchasers and Defendants Nos. 11 and 12.
5. I also make it clear that the question is not about the type of car parking for the societies but about the number of car parking spaces. The developer confirms that the maximum possible basement parking has been provided. A part of the land had to be set back for a pipeline from a neighbouring plot or building, and to which I made reference in my previous order. This does not entitle the societies to make additional demands irrespective or independent of the pipeline and car parking issue. The societies are expected to be reasonable. They are at liberty to allot the basement car parking on a rotational basis or in such other manner as they thing fit in accordance with the law. But this cannot hold up the development of free sale component. Strictly speaking, any fire compliance is also unrelated to the parking issue. I am only allowing Mr Shah to voice it for the societies since it is a question of safety.
6. List the matter on 20th September 2021 for hearing.
7. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary of this Court. All concerned will act on production of a digitally signed copy of this order.
(G. S. PATEL, J) Page 3 of 3 11th August 2021