Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

One Mr.Gulam Mohammad Qureshi was the owner and possessor of 155.55 sq.yds forming part of Plot No.10 having purchased the same under a registered sale deed dt.26.08.1989. He in turn has entered into Agreement to develop his property by means of multistoried housing complex under a Deed dt.24.02.2004 with the Opposite Party No1. Accordingly, the Opposite Party No.1 has obtained permission from the Opposite Party No.5 on 17.04.2004 for construction of Ground+2 upper floors. In view of the fact that the Opposite Party No.1 had an Agreement for Development of the total area of 679.87 sq.yds, he could have got permission for construction of stilt + 5 upper floors and there could not have been any objection from Opposite Party No.5. But the Opposite Party No.1 had constructed Ground+3 upper floors to the knowledge of the members of the complainant Association as one block in the entire area of 679.87 sq.yds. In fact in the land of 524.32 sq.yds, the Opposite Party No.1 had constructed only flats in the Ground floor as G.1 commercial and G.1 residential under due permission and the balance of area is left for parking of the vehicles which is more than sufficient for all the flats in the entire block. The owners i.e. Opposite Party No.3 and 4 have been allotted Flat No.G.1 (residential), 205, 301 and 304 and part of Flat No.104 and out of them the Opposite Parties 3 and 4 have sold the Flat No.205 and in the remaining area of 155.55 sq.yds. Flat No.104 part and Flat No.105 had been allotted to the owner Mr.Gulam Mohammad Qureshi and while retaining the Flat No.105 for himself and the Opposite Parties 3 and 4 have sold the Flat No.104 to another person. In fact, only 16 flats had been constructed on the entire area of 679.87 sq.yds. The Flat No.201 was sold on 23.05.2005, Flat No.104 was sold on 22.06.2005, Flat No.103 was sold on 02.09.2005, Flat No.202 was sold on 31.10.2005 and G.1 commercial was sold on 05.12.2005 to M/s.T.Ramulu and T.Sarojini who have been running the shop from the beginning. The pent house was not constructed by the builder (Opposite Party No.1) and it was constructed by the owners in two portions. On the demand by the flat purchasers, one portion was allotted for the office of their society and the other portion has been retained by the Opposite Parties 3 and 4. The complainant is estopped from raising the objection at this belated stage regarding the construction of the pent house for all these years. The members of the complainant Association having purchased their flats in the year 2005 and 2006, cannot question the same in the year 2011 and thus their claim if any is barred by limitation. The other owners i.e. Mohd. Waliur Rahaman Quraishi, Sayeed Unissa and Gulam Mahamood Quraishi are also necessary parties to this proceedings since they are the owners of the flats and also the vendors of the flats and thus the complaint is not maintainable for misjoinder and non-joinder of necessary parties.