Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

32. The submission of respondent No.3 that the petitioners cannot claim anything beyond plinth area cannot be accepted. If that contention is accepted absolutely, Clause 2(C)(6) would become meaningless. A cooperative society cannot be left owning only a footprint of construction while having no access to roads, passages, services or common open areas. At the same time, the petitioners cannot insist on a carving out of separate plots in disregard of other buildings and common facilities. The balance lies in granting plinth plus appurtenant area and undivided WP-13685-22 with connected.doc proportionate rights in common amenities.