MUMBAI: The Maharashtra state cooperative appellate court docket has mentioned a tenant or a go away and licence holder has the precise to park their automobile within the house allotted to a member on the society premises. It has “quickly restrained” a cooperative housing society at Nepeansea Street from stopping a flat proprietor from permitting an individual who had rented his flat to make use of his parking slot, stories Swati Deshpande.
The February 9 judgment mentioned that the one query that arose for consideration was “whether or not the licensee can benefit from the alloted parking house which is allotted to…the member of the society?” It added, “A automobile parking house allotted to the proprietor can be utilized by the tenant as he has full rights over it.”
“As per Growth Management Guidelines framed underneath the MRTP Act, 1966, the tenant can’t be denied parking,” said the judgment in an attraction filed by a member of the south Mumbai society.
The February 9 judgment by appellate court docket member S S Kakade mentioned, “The society mustn’t discriminate, as parking guidelines are ruled by DC Guidelines and if the proprietor is eligible to get parking house, then the tenant must also get the advantage of that house.”
Retired Military Brigadier S S Kadan (68) had appealed towards a cooperative court docket order final 12 months rejecting his plea for interim aid. He had challenged the society’s 2014 automobile parking coverage as “arbitrary and unreasonable”.
When he determined final 12 months to let loose his flat, he mentioned the society confirmed him the 2014 coverage that units out precedence for automobile parking and rejected his request to allow his licensee to park a automobile within the society premises.
The society has 110 members and 101 parking slots, he mentioned. The society, although, mentioned there have been solely 70 parking slots for 110 flats.
His counsel, Aditya Chitale and Prathamesh Bhosle, mentioned Kadan bought a flat within the constructing in 2006 and was allotted an open-to-sky automobile parking slot by the society. He sought a declaration that his licensee was entitled to make use of his open automobile parking slot within the society premises. He additionally sought to forestall the society from obstructing such potential tenants from utilizing his parking house for a brief interval.
The society, by means of regulation agency AAK Authorized, argued its automobile parking coverage permitted by the AGM was honest to all members and “properly throughout the ambit of Bye Legislation 78 (B), which particularly states that if a society has the precise to allot parking, then no different member can switch or assign it to some other particular person”.
The society’s counsel mentioned precedence to parking house was based mostly on three preferences–first to members not allotted any, second to members who owned a second car and still have one parking, and third is for momentary parking to company and tenants, offered house is accessible.
The society admitted the Brigadier’s licensees have been allowed automobile parking until 2014. From then, until 2020, the household occupied it.
The court docket mentioned the flat proprietor was solely searching for aid to “to not forestall his licensee from having fun with’’ his parking house for a brief interval, “therefore the query of non-availability of house as alleged by the society doesn’t come up”.
“The trial court docket failed to think about that the licensee has the precise to benefit from the amenities and facilities connected to the flat, which he/she has taken on a license foundation until the license interval is over,’’ mentioned the cooperative attraction court docket judgment, setting apart the trial court docket order.
The judgment additionally mentioned trial court docket failed to think about that since September 2020, the society allowed Kadan’s licensee to park her car within the slot on fee of each day expenses.
It additionally mentioned the flat proprietor has a proper to hunt inspection of the society data freed from price underneath the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, and directed the society to permit him such inspection.
The court docket directed the trial court docket to determine the dispute over levy of any penalty, apart from acceptable parking expenses, expeditiously, inside eight months.