Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Pankaj Jain
Essel Towers Residents Welfare Association – Appellant
Versus
Essel Housing Projects Private Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conclusion and dismissal of the revision petition. (Para 1 , 20) |
| 2. dispute over ownership of common property. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's rulings on claims of ownership. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. application of real estate (regulation and development) act. (Para 9 , 10 , 14) |
| 5. court's analysis of jurisdiction and injunctions. (Para 11 , 12 , 18) |
| 6. final decision supporting plaintiff's case. (Para 13 , 15 , 17 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Pankaj Jain, J.:
The defendants are in revision aggrieved of the order dated 10.2.2022 passed by Additional District Judge, Gurugram allowing the application filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 Code of Civil Procedure (In short, “CPC”).
2. The plaintiff filed suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction. The plaintiff is the developer and has developed residential group housing complex named ‘Essel Towers’. The defendant petitioner is a society registered under Haryana Registration and Regulation of Societies Act, 2012 formed by the allottees/purchasers of the apartment in the residential project. As per the plaintiff, 8,50,000 square feet built up residential area stands allotted to the pilot society
Property ownership rights under buyers' agreements and the Real Estate Act were upheld, confirming the plaintiff's exclusive rights and the dismissal of the defendants' claims for community facility ....
A single association suffices for a project under prior registration, but distinct associations are mandated by law for managing separate phases, emphasizing the necessity of forming a federation for....
In deemed conveyance for TDR layouts, society gets plinth area plus distinctly demarcated appurtenant marginal open spaces per sanctioned plans, and undivided proportionate recreational ground share;....
Modifications to sanctioned real estate plans affecting common amenities require two-thirds consent from allottees, as mandated by the RERA Act.
The maintenance charges in a condominium must be proportionate to the undivided interest of each apartment owner in common areas and facilities, as governed by the Apartment Act.
(1) Arbitration Clause – Arbitration Clause in the Agreement does not bar the jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora to entertain the Complaint.(2) Additional Amount – Developer is entitled to charge the ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
