No contractor can sell a car park in Maharashtra, since the Bombay Supreme Court has decided that a stilt car park is a common parking lot available to members of the housing company. The same is true for other states. … A garage or covered car park cannot be sold separately, as the treatment remains the same as the ease fee. In addition, in its FAQ of January 17, 2017, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty State stated in its FaQ of January 17, 2017 that, in accordance with Section 2 (n) of the RERA Act, open parking areas and hence open parking areas cannot be sold to all. The RERA or Real Estate (regulation and development), act, 2016, defines under section 2 (y) “garage” as a place inside a project with a roof and walls on three sides for parking a vehicle, but does not include an undyed or undyed parking lot as an open parking lot. 3. The company may change the allowance after its formation. “RERA and MahaRERA only talk about covered car parks, but the rules do not include open car parks. As a result, open car parks are not covered by the rules,” said dipan Merchant, Bombay`s chief lawyer. Haryana RERA Executive Director, Dilbag Singh Sihag says a developer has the right to “sell covered parking lots, but open parking spaces cannot be sold.” If a developer has spent money to make a car park, then he would like to get that money back, that`s his reason. 2.
Subsequently, it can also make a sales statement with the apartment and parking and receive the sales announcement in question, This is also the first time that the law explicitly defines common areas, which are open parking lots, cellars, stairs, elevators, lobby and parks. Mullick also explains that FAQ No. 9 authorizes the sale of a garage under the law and the sale of a covered car park in accordance with the rules of Maharashtra RERA. “Open car parks cannot be sold under RERA, only garages can be sold,” he adds. “34. We have come to the final question: what are a developer`s rights to society (housing buyers) with respect to stilt parking spaces. It was argued that the developer`s right to dispose of the stilt parking lot was a matter of contractual, legal and fundamental law of the promoter and that this right would not be affected. This argument is based on the premise that stilt parking is itself a “housing” within the meaning of Section 2 (a-1) and, alternatively, is not part of “common areas”. But we have already found that “stilt parking” is not a “garage” and even less a “housing” and is part of “common areas.” As a necessary consequence of our answers to the question of points (i) to iii), it should be considered that stilt car parks are part of the “common areas” of the building developed by the project proponent, the only right that the developer has to charge the cost in relation to the carpeted area of each dwelling buyer.