Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

       C)     Tenements Statement
       i.     Tenements as per sanctioned plan,(Wing A.),                     31 Nos.
       ii.    Tenements at actual. (Wing.A.)                                  31 Nos.
       iii.   Tenements as per completion certificate:                           Nil."

5. The application came to be resisted by the Respondent No.2 contending that as per the layout the area of the total land was 13,456 sqr.mtrs and the land available for construction was net area 10,294.50 sqr.mtrs. with total available FSI for construction being 10,193.28 sqr.mtrs. as per the layout. The table of the FSI consumed by the super structures on the larger land was set out. As far as Petitioner is concerned, it was contended that the Petitioner-Society had consumed FSI of 1627.78 sqr.mtrs (Area constructed). It was contended that the total FSI consumed was 9735.30 sqr.mtrs. and the 5 of 23 wp1334-21f FSI which remain to be utilised was 457.98 sqr.mtrs. as per the old layout. It was further contended that as per the revised layout sanctioned by Pune Municipal Corporation on 13 th January, 2017, the total permissible FSI was 16031.70 sqr.mtrs and thus the balance unutilised FSI was 6296.67 sqr.mtrs and the Respondent No.2 claimed right in the said unutilised FSI. The Respondent No.2 expressed its willingness to execute the conveyance in the name of the Petitioner- Society of an area of 1627.78 sqr.mtrs. along with the proportionate land in the open space only.

(f) Petitioner Society should not cause any obstruction to the Respondent No.1 from carrying out balance construction on the remaining plot.

7. Accordingly, Certificate came to be issued by the Competent Authority entitling the Petitioner-society to deemed conveyance of area admeasuring 1103.55 sqr.mtrs. alongwith constructed area admeasuring1627.78 sqr.mtrs. with undivided proportionate share in the open spaces etc. SUBMISSIONS:

8. Mr.Nikte, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner has taken this Court through the record and proceedings and would submit that in 2016, after filing of application for deemed conveyance the revised layout was sanctioned in the year 2017. He submits that as per the revised layout, FSI is sought to be loaded on other buildings in the layout and by reason thereof, the Competent Authority has granted a deemed conveyance of a lesser area. He submits that the Competent Authority has looked into the revised layout of the year 2017, whereas the obligations to be conveyed by the promoter were as on the date of execution of the flat purchasers agreements. He submits that the Petitioner-Society has filed Regular Civil Suit No.1215 of 2019 7 of 23 wp1334-21f challenging the revalidation of the building plan by commencement certificate dated 13th January, 2017, which is pending. He submits that without the consent of the Petitioner-Society there can be no revision of the layout under Section 7 and 7A of the MOFA. He has taken this Court to the various clauses of the sale agreement with the flat purchasers and would submit that the promoter was under an obligation to form an association of apartment owners and to convey the land and the building within the period of two years. He submits that as per 2006 layout, the entire FSI was consumed. He submits that it is an admitted position in the reply of the Respondent No.2 that as per the old layout the remaining FSI was 457.98 sq.mtrs. and as per the new layout the promoter is now seeking to utilize the balance FSI of 6296.67 sqr.mtrs. which is not the property of the developer. He submits that the Competent Authority was mandated by law to convey the land and building as per the layout of the year 2001 and not as per the revised layout of 2017.

9. Per contra, Mr. Mandlik, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 would submit that the Architect's certificate which is being relied upon by the Petitioner does not give the correct constructed area. He submits that the Architect's certificate provides for the proposed built-up area of the Society at 10,192.43 sqr.mtrs. and by considering the same has certified that the proportionate area to be transferred to the Society as 1643.79 sqr.mtrs. He submits that as per the said 8 of 23 wp1334-21f certificate, the total built-up area of the society is 1627.78 sqr.mtrs. He would further submit that the proportionate area includes the open spaces and the amenity space for arriving of the figure 1643.79 sqr.mtrs. He submits that a civil suit is already pending challenging the revised layout and the issue can therefore be decided in the Civil Court. He would further submit that if the relief sought for by the Petitioner is granted then the same would result into an imbalance of the FSI necessitating the impleading of the other societies situated on the said plot. He submits that this Court may not interfere under Article 227 in the findings of the Competent Authority which is based on the revised layout.

24. As the Petitioner has already initiated civil proceedings to challenge the revised layout the same will be matter of adjudication of the Civil Court. The Competent authority is not empowered to adjudicate the issue as regards the entitlement of the property and has to act within the jurisdiction conferred under Section 11 of the MOFA.

25. The Competent Authority while granting certificate for execution of unilateral deemed conveyance has restricted the area of land to be conveyed to 1103.55 square meters and constructed built 20 of 23 wp1334-21f up area to 1627.78 square meters on the basis of the revised layout plan of 13th January, 2017. The Competent Authority has further held that the area of 1628.08 square meters of the Row Houses should be deducted from the larger land and balance area to be transferred to the Petitioner. From the material which is available on record before this Court, the basis for the calculation of an area of 1103.55 square meters to be conveyed is not disclosed. The Competent Authority has merely relied upon the revised sanctioned plan of 13 th January, 2017 and granted deemed conveyance of 1103.55 square meters. There is clear disregard of the Government Resolution of 22 nd June, 2018 which provides that conveyance is to be granted of land required to sustain the constructed structure along with the proportionate area in common amenities. The inquiry contemplated by the government resolution was thus not carried out by the Competent Authority. CONCLUSION: