Parking Provided With Units Must Be Safe And Usable, Mere Paper Allotment Not Enough: MahaRERA
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has recently held that a developer cannot discharge its obligations by merely allotting parking spaces on paper. It held that a unit buyer is entitled to parking that is safe, usable and functional in actual use. A coram of Member Mahesh Pathak, while partly allowing a complaint against Godiva Properties Private Limited, emphasised...
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has recently held that a developer cannot discharge its obligations by merely allotting parking spaces on paper. It held that a unit buyer is entitled to parking that is safe, usable and functional in actual use.
A coram of Member Mahesh Pathak, while partly allowing a complaint against Godiva Properties Private Limited, emphasised that contractual allotment alone is not sufficient.
The authority observed, “once car parking is agreed upon and consideration is charged therefor, the same must be safe, usable, and functional. Mere allotment of parking on paper cannot defeat the substantive right of an allottee to safe parking.On a prima facie perusal of the photographs uploaded by the complainant, it appears that the parking spaces lack adequate side margins and may be unsafe for regular use.”
The complaint was filed by Investez LLP through its partner Abubaker Memon in connection with a unit booked in the Pune project “Kohinoor World Tower Phase 1.”
Under a registered agreement for sale executed in February 2022, the developer agreed to sell the unit along with two covered car parking spaces for a total consideration of about Rs 1.80 crore.
The entire amount was paid, and possession was handed over in May 2024 after the project received its Occupation Certificate.A parking allotment letter issued at the time allotted two stack parking spaces in the basement.
According to the complainant, issues with the parking became evident only after possession was taken. It was alleged that the allotted stack parking was unsafe, unusable and poorly planned, with inadequate side margins that made regular use risky.
The unit buyer also contended that insurance companies had refused to insure vehicles parked in the allotted spaces due to safety concerns. The developer, however, opposed the complaint, raising an objection on maintainability on the ground that the agreement was executed with Investez Services LLP.
It also contended that the parking was allotted as per sanctioned plans, accepted without protest and improved through minor re-marking and adjustments.
MahaRERA rejected the objection on maintainability as the the complainant-partner represented the unit buyer under the registered agreement. On merits, the authority noted that the photographs placed on record by the complainant “prima facie indicate inadequate side margins” and recorded that the developer had failed to place any sanctioned layout plan or technical material to demonstrate compliance with prescribed safety norms.
Observing that the parking “may be unsafe for regular use,” the authority directed the parties to jointly inspect the allotted parking spaces. It ordered that alternative safe and functional parking be provided if the existing spaces are found unusable. Failure to comply would invite action under the RERA Act.
Case Title: Investez LLP v. Godiva Properties Private Limited
Complaint Number: CC12400158
For Complainant: Advocate Pratik Pawar
For Respondent: Advocate Diksha Dhoka