SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Cal) 286

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
DIPANKAR DATTA, J.
Barin Saha & ors. - Petitioners
Vs.
State of West Bengal & ors. - Respondents
W.P. No. 9286 (W) of 2016
Decided On : 27-06-2016

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Soumya Majumder, Mr. Debasish Kundu
For the State : Mr. Tulsids Ray
For the Respondent: Mr. Prasanta Dutt, Mr. Syamantak Banerjee, Ms. Ballari Banerjee
For the addition of party : Mr. Kishore Dutta, Mr. Ayan Banerjee

In a housing complex with different types of apartments for different income groups, the formation of separate associations for maintenance work is not totally barred under the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 and the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Bye Laws, 1974, provided that such associations are formed in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the bye-laws.

Headnote:

APARTMENT OWNERSHIP - WEST BENGAL APARTMENT OWNERSHIP ACT, 1972 - SECTIONS 3(K), 3(D), 5, 13 - WEST BENGAL APARTMENT OWNERSHIP BYE LAWS, 1974 - SECTIONS 3, 4 - HOUSING COMPLEX WITH DIFFERENT TYPES OF APARTMENTS FOR DIFFERENT INCOME GROUPS - FORMATION OF SEPARATE ASSOCIATIONS FOR MAINTENANCE - HELD, NOT TOTALLY BARRED.

Fact of the Case:

In a housing complex with different types of apartments for different income groups, the petitioners, who were H.I.G. apartment owners, sought to form a separate association for maintenance work. The M.I.G. and L.I.G. apartment owners objected, contending that only one association could be formed for the entire complex.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the formation of separate associations for maintenance work under the Act was not totally barred. It interpreted the relevant provisions of the Act and the bye-laws to conclude that even in respect of a big housing complex having different types of apartments meant for sale to people of different income groups, there could be separate land, building and the common areas and facilities for that particular type of apartment and such demarcated land or earmarked building and the common areas and facilities for that particular income group would be a separate property within the same housing complex.

Issues: Whether the formation of separate associations for maintenance work in a housing complex with different types of apartments for different income groups was permissible under the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 and the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Bye Laws, 1974.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the definitions of "property" and "common areas and facilities" in the Act, as well as the provisions relating to the rights of each apartment owner in the common areas and facilities. It also considered the bye-laws framed under the Act, which provided for the formation of an association for each property and the powers and functions of such an association. The court concluded that a conjoint reading of the Act and the bye-laws led to the conclusion that separate associations could be formed for different types of apartments in a housing complex.

Final Decision: The court vacated the interim order that had been passed earlier, which had permitted the H.I.G. apartment owners to hold a meeting for the purpose of constituting an ad hoc committee to look after the maintenance of the facilities useable by them. The court directed that the decision taken at the meeting could be given effect to, but it would be subject to and abide by the result of the writ petition.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioners and the added respondents reside in their respective apartments comprised in Subarna Bhoomi Housing Complex at 36, Gorakshabasi Road, Kolkata – 700028 (hereafter the housing complex). The housing complex has been developed by the respondents 3 and 4. A total of 320 apartments are comprised in the housing complex of which 50% are owned by individuals belonging to high income group (hereafter H.I.G.) and the balance 50% by individuals belonging to middle and low income groups (hereafter M.I.G. and L.I.G). It is not in dispute that the owners of the apartments are bound by the provisions of the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act, 1972.

2. The question that would arise for decision on this writ petition after the parties exchange their affidavits is whether in terms of the provisions of the Act, a separate association for the purpose of looking after maintenance work could be formed by the H.I.G. apartment owners or whether one association comprised of owners belonging to H.I.G., M.I.G. and L.I.G. is required to be formed.

3. The writ petition was moved on May 13, 2016. An interim order was passed permitting the meeting scheduled on May 15, 2016 to be held for the purpose of constitution of an ad hoc committee, to whom the respondents 3 and 4 would hand over the responsibility of maintaining the facilities useable by the H.I.G. apartment owners of the housing complex; however, it was also observed that no effect should be given to the decision taken at such meeting. By a further order dated May 18, 2016, the interim order passed earlier was directed to continue till July 31, 2016.

4. The H.I.G. apartment owners were not parties to the writ petition and an application for addition of party having been filed by some of them, the same was allowed by an order dated June 15, 2016.

5. Mr. Mazumder, learned advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Dutta, learned senior standing counsel representing the State and Mr. Kishore Datta, learned senior advocate representing the added respondents have been heard at length on the question of extension of interim order. Having heard the parties and on perusal of the provisions of the Act, this Bench is of the prima facie view that formation of separate associations to look after maintenance work under the Act is not totally barred.

6. Section 3(k) defines property. To the extent relevant, it reads as follows:

“Property” comprises the land, the building and the common areas and facilities and in case of complexes having different types of apartments meant for selling to people of different income groups, property shall mean the land, building and the common areas and facilities for that particular type of apartment”.

The expression “common areas and facilities” has been defined in section 3(d) and, inter alia, include:-

“(1) the land on which the building is located and all easements, rights and appurtenances belonging to the land and the building,

(2) the foundations, columns, girders, beams, supports, main walls, roofs, halls, corridors, lobbies, stairs, stairways, fire-escapes and entrances and exists of the building,

(3) the basements, cellars, yards, gardens, parking areas, shopping centres, schools, garages, building or apartments vacant or occupied by a tenant or any other person not being an owner, and transferred or proposed to be transferred to the Association of Apartment Owners and storage spaces,***”

Section 5 of the Act also provides for rights of each apartment owner in the common areas and facilities. It reads:-

“5. Common areas and facilities.-

(1) Each apartment owner shall be entitled to an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities in the percentage expressed in the Declaration.

(2) The percentage of the undivided interest of each apartment owner in the common areas and facilities as expressed in the Declaration shall not be altered [Without the written consent of all the apartment owners. Addition or alteration if any, is to be expressed subsequently] in an



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top