Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

26.10 According to Defendant Nos. 1 to 3, the carpet area of their flats is much higher than what is stated by the Plaintiff Society in the Plaint, as per their Licensed Surveyor Report annexed and marked as Exhibit N at page 359 to their detailed Affidavit dated 6th June 2016. It is submitted on behalf of the Plaintiff that the carpet area of the flat of Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and all other Members have been correctly measured by the Plaintiff. The same is established by the following:

However, Flat No. A/203 admeasures 553 sq. ft. and Flat No. A/204 admeasures 303 sq. ft. The aggregate of these two flats is 856 sq. ft., which corresponds to 428 x 2. This explains the differences in the areas of certain flats in A Wing at present when compared with the areas shown in the sanctioned OC plan. However, the average of the aggregate areas of such pairs of neighbouring flats is the area as per the sanctioned OC plan, viz. 428 sq. ft. The additional areas given to the Plaintiff's Members in the redevelopment are calculated on the present area occupied by these Members and a tabular representation of these areas is annexed as Annexure "S" to the Compilation tendered along with the Affidavit in Rejoinder dated 12th July 2016.

(viii) In so far as Flat No. 002 in the A-Wing is concerned, Defendant No. 1 has raised the dispute regarding the correctness of the carpet area for the first time in Paragraph 11(xv.) at pg. 43 of her Rejoinder in response to the Written Argument of the Plaintiff dated 26 th July 2016. She contends that her Flat No. A-002 admeasures 356.60 sq. ft. She has arrived at this area by assuming that Flat No. A/102 which is directly above her flat admeasures 475.39 sq. ft., and she deducts an area equivalent to 118.39 sq. ft., being the area of one bedroom as per her surveyor's calculations, from the said 475.39 sq. ft. and arrives at the said figure of 356.60 sq. ft. The Plaintiff has correctly calculated the area of the said Flat No. A/002 as 264 sq. feet exactly as per the sanctioned OC Plan. The Plaintiff has added 23 sq. feet extra area, being 60% of the 'Otla' area (of 37sq. ft.) to this area, resulting in the total area of 287 sq. feet. The said method of calculation, i.e. calculating the carpet area as per the sanctioned OC Plan and adding 60% of the Otla area, has been consistently applied to all the ground floor flats of the Plaintiff -Society.

(b) Members of the B wing having flat Nos. 003/103/203/303 and 403; and D Wing having flats nos. 103/203/303 are entitled to receive an additional 10 square feet area, being 60% of the 16 sq. ft. area of the portion of the passage which actually forms part of these flats. This area has been agreed by all the Members of the Plaintiff Society. In fact, the area of each Member is mentioned in the draft development agreement and is not objected to by a single member save and except Defendant Nos.1 to 3.