The reported apex court judgment has not come a day too soon. Pending a study of its text , the verdict, in essence, makes for a conscious and welcome noting.
Perhaps, more such developments could be expected not-in-the far-off future, for having the woes of flats or apartment buyers, judicially resolved, through joint action as a community / class, instead of individually.
May be so, even after the long awaited RERA has taken to its wings, and the planned state-wise tribunals have come into being and started functioning.
Report says: “The NCRDC, however, stated that a cooperative society or a group of cooperative societies is not entitled to file a complaint under Section 12 (1) (c).”
Why NCRDC so stated is, in absence of details. unclear. Also unclear why such a stance could have been validly taken had the intricacies and implications of the spl. state law governing Flats / Apartments been addressed /appreciated. Be that as it may, no such stand /view could, by any logic or reasoning, be rightly taken / sustained, in a case in which so called CHS, purchasers' co-operative society,- to be recognized as ' a 'legal entity'- has been,as envisaged by the said law, been duly formed / constituted and the dispute with builder / seller is taken to any authority by one or more such CHS.
For knowing the reasons / causa causans for fallout problems invariably experienced by purchasers, may look up the material available in public domain ( sample- the write-up @ http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/…/4202-the-apartment-law… READ THE COMMENTS)
Going by memory, in fact, instances are not wanting in which buyers were obliged to move a civil or other court by subscribing to in individual names, but initiating remedial action (such as filing of a civil suit) jointly and severally. That became necessary only in order to meet or circumvent the logically-faulty stand taken by a erring builder to the effect that the disputants had not constituted and registered a formal 'owners' association'- as per the mandated requirement of the governing state special law on apartments and within its strict legal meaning. (e.g. look through the report @
http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/…/2392-lt-south-city-swi… )
The SC verdict may come to the help in a big way of, and be of immense relief to, the commonly aggrieved buyers even in those, or other similar types of cases, in which, the referred or other mandates of the cited special law had remained to be complied with, for no fault of buyers though.
Cross Refer :https://www.google.co.in/…&*
You are not logged in . Please login to post comments.
Trouble Logging in? Try following the given steps -
1. Visit your inbox to find a confirmation mail from LAWyersClubIndia.
2. Click on the confirmation link and confirm your signup
Download
The reported apex court judgment has not come a day too soon. Pending a study of its text , the verdict, in essence, makes for a conscious and welcome noting. Perhaps, more such developments could be expected not-in-the far-off future, for having the woes of flats or apartment buyers, judicially resolved, through joint action as a community / class, instead of individually. May be so, even after the long awaited RERA has taken to its wings, and the planned state-wise tribunals have come into being and started functioning. Report says: “The NCRDC, however, stated that a cooperative society or a group of cooperative societies is not entitled to file a complaint under Section 12 (1) (c).” Why NCRDC so stated is, in absence of details. unclear. Also unclear why such a stance could have been validly taken had the intricacies and implications of the spl. state law governing Flats / Apartments been addressed /appreciated. Be that as it may, no such stand /view could, by any logic or reasoning, be rightly taken / sustained, in a case in which so called CHS, purchasers' co-operative society,- to be recognized as ' a 'legal entity'- has been,as envisaged by the said law, been duly formed / constituted and the dispute with builder / seller is taken to any authority by one or more such CHS. For knowing the reasons / causa causans for fallout problems invariably experienced by purchasers, may look up the material available in public domain ( sample- the write-up @ http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/…/4202-the-apartment-law… READ THE COMMENTS) Going by memory, in fact, instances are not wanting in which buyers were obliged to move a civil or other court by subscribing to in individual names, but initiating remedial action (such as filing of a civil suit) jointly and severally. That became necessary only in order to meet or circumvent the logically-faulty stand taken by a erring builder to the effect that the disputants had not constituted and registered a formal 'owners' association'- as per the mandated requirement of the governing state special law on apartments and within its strict legal meaning. (e.g. look through the report @ http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/…/2392-lt-south-city-swi… ) The SC verdict may come to the help in a big way of, and be of immense relief to, the commonly aggrieved buyers even in those, or other similar types of cases, in which, the referred or other mandates of the cited special law had remained to be complied with, for no fault of buyers though. Cross Refer :https://www.google.co.in/…&*