One of the most striking features of UP Apartment Act 2010 is the mandatory Deeds of Declaration (DOD) from the builder that discloses in writing the building(s) as well as the entire parcel of land to the residents
The recent Allahabad High Court order in the Purvanchal Silvercity II, Greater Noida, case has once again brought the Deeds of Declaration (DoD) in focus. Hon’ble Justice Suneet Kumar ruled that elections in the residential complex will be strictly based on DoD. So in case you thought the election to the apartment owners association was as simple as one person from one flat casting his/her vote, think again. The truth is each resident’s voting share depends on the size of the flat he occupies, besides the undivided share in common areas. Loosely translated, it means if you own a big size flat, your voting share will be more than your pal who lives in a smaller apartment. But what exactly is a DoD and why is it so important? It is basically the document by which the builder admits in writing (true disclosure) of what is built on site. It includes area statements regarding the apartments, common areas and facilities, independent and limited common areas and facilities and the details of the materials used for construction. It’s vide the Deed of Declaration that the builder also ‘conveys’ the building(s) as well as the entire parcel of land to the residents. It’s an important piece of document because it tells homeowners the exact layout plans of the plot and the promoter cannot change the scheme without the written consent of all the allottees. It also means that the apartment owners association also can’t decide with majority vote to build a temple or any other structure on common area without everyone’s consent. Just to add, none of the Noida developers have submitted a DoD to the authority. Neighbouring Indirapuram residents will also recall getting notices by the Ghaziabad Development Authority (GDA) in September last that their flats will be seized unless DoD were submitted to the civic agency. The notices took homeowners by surprise as the so-called deeds had to be submitted by their housing societies, not individual flats. But for the GDA, the move to serve individual notices was perhaps meant more as a pressure tactic. It worked, too, as developers of more than 50 housing societies quickly submitted the deeds. But why does the builder need to submit it to the authority?
The Backgrounder: Housing
is a necessity for all human beings and it’s the government’s responsibility to
provide shelter to all its citizens. However, the government being constrained
by resources looks towards private developers to construct group housing
complexes and condominiums by which everyone benefits – the citizens, the
government (revenues by plot auction, FAR sale and stamp duty) and obviously
the builders. We all know that the development authority is allotted land by
the state government for urban development as per the approved master plan,
which comprises residential, commercial, institutional, recreational, sports
and green areas. The areas meant for residential development is auctioned at
lower rates vis-à-vis area earmarked for commercial development. It is,
therefore, expected that private builders will construct group housing projects
and hand over the management of the buildings and parcels of land to the
residents, represented by the Association of Apartment Owners or Residents
Welfare Associations, and move out of the condominiums.
The
provision for Deed of Declaration is stipulated under Section 12 of the UP
Apartment Act, 2010, and governed under Rule 3 of the UP Apartment Rules, 2011,
and it can only be amended with permission of Competent Authority under Rule 4
of 2011 Rules. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court passed a landmark judgment under Civil
Misc. Writ Petition 33826 of 2012 on 14.11.2013, which ironed out the creases
for effective and expeditious implementation of 2010 Act in the state. The court
has comprehensively dealt with the Deed of Declaration subject within the 14 conclusions
it has drawn in paragraph 65 of the order.
Residents’
Rights
1. The Deed
of Declaration is a must for securing the following rights of every resident:
a) Land
Rights – i.e., undivided rights over parcel of land;
b) Voting
Rights – proportionate to the builder’s sale deed value of the apartment (not
the subsequent sale deed value).
2. Covered
Area compliance: area mentioned in declaration and sale deed should be same. In
case builder has erred, it can be amended under Rule 4 and only by consent of
residents, the amendment can be finalized by the competent authority. For
obvious vested commercial interests, builders will not willingly submit the Deed
of Declaration. However, it is in the interest of residents that under the
provision of UP Apartment 2010 Act and the High Court judgment, the development
authority and the builder can be compelled to submit the declaration and
protect the apartment owners’ statutory rights.
True disclosure of the project
According
to the UP Apartment 2010 Act:(2) Declaration has to be filed by all promoters within 12 months from the date of approval of building plan and within 90 days for constructed or under-construction buildings.
(3) Promoter cannot change the scheme without the written consent of all the allottees.
(1) The ‘competent authority’ includes vice chairman of the development or the collector of the district. In case of the industrial development authority the competent authority shall be the chief executive officer (CEO) of the industrial development authority.
(2) For the purposes of discharging functions and duties and resolving the disputes the competent authority will be entitled to delegate its powers to an officer not below the rank of joint secretary, including legal advisor of the authority and any sub divisional magistrate of the district in case of a district.
(3) The competent authority will also be entitled to verify the contents of the declaration under Section 12 of the UP Apartment Act, 2010, and to decide any question, which may arise out of such declaration.
(4) Any dispute raised before the competent authority shall be decided by the competent authority or delegatee as provided above or his delegatee as provided above, to be decided by the officer notified by the state government under Section 27 (2) and (3) of the Act, before it is brought before the Court of law.
(1) After the enforcement of the UP Apartment Act, 2010, no builder, promoter can resist/ or delay the formation of association of apartment owners under Section 14 of the Act.
(2) If the promoter does not get the association registered, the apartment owners can get it registered after a notice giving some time to the promoter and adopt model bylaws. In this case the registrar of societies shall not refuse the registration of the association of the apartment owners.
(3) The promoter, however, has to be made a member as he is jointly responsible with the apartment owners to form an association. Even if he does not get the association registered and does not join or his authorised agents subscribe to be members of the association, he will be deemed to be member of the association for the purposes of enforcement of the Act as the promoter being the member of the association has duties and liabilities under the Act which he has to enforce.
(1) Promoters will have to disclose
all details of the project and common assets to buyer before allotment.
Competent Authority
About formation of AOAs
Conclusion:
The Deed of Declaration is as important and valuable as the apartment
sale deed. Since we residents pay as per ‘Super Area’, value for money for the
apartment flows via the undivided land rights and voting rights over the entire
parcel of land on which the group housing project is constructed. The 2010 Act
and Hon’ble High Court has provided substantial rights to the residents, which
needs to be effectively used to seek value of our hard earned money!
RWAs are for a purpose but we see most of them working for individuals interest of management body - even at the cost of society funds and welfare of members.
ReplyDeleteFor example, RWA of Krishna Apra Residency (Block: E-8, Sector-61, NOIDA) - a group housing society, is taking a number of illegal decisions and exhorting money from residents. Most residents are busy in their work / offices and find little time to intervene. Given this scenario, RWA has started making structural changes in the society (in public / common space) such as a new gate for the society, changes in individual buildings, parking spaces etc. None of these are based on consent of the residents but through nexus of management of RWA. They are using these projects to exhort more money from residents as well as siphon off money through civil and maintenance work. Unfortunately most residents are silent and paying instead of acting against these corrupt practices, which only motivates the RWA management to be bolder in their corrupt work.
RWAs are for a purpose but we see most of them working for individuals interest of management body - even at the cost of society funds and welfare of members.
ReplyDeleteFor example, RWA of Krishna Apra Residency (Block: E-8, Sector-61, NOIDA) - a group housing society, is taking a number of illegal decisions and exhorting money from residents. Most residents are busy in their work / offices and find little time to intervene. Given this scenario, RWA has started making structural changes in the society (in public / common space) such as a new gate for the society, changes in individual buildings, parking spaces etc. None of these are based on consent of the residents but through nexus of management of RWA. They are using these projects to exhort more money from residents as well as siphon off money through civil and maintenance work. Unfortunately most residents are silent and paying instead of acting against these corrupt practices, which only motivates the RWA management to be bolder in their corrupt work.
RWAs are for a purpose but we see most of them working for individuals interest of management body - even at the cost of society funds and welfare of members.
ReplyDeleteFor example, RWA of Krishna Apra Residency (Block: E-8, Sector-61, NOIDA) - a group housing society, is taking a number of illegal decisions and exhorting money from residents. Most residents are busy in their work / offices and find little time to intervene. Given this scenario, RWA has started making structural changes in the society (in public / common space) such as a new gate for the society, changes in individual buildings, parking spaces etc. None of these are based on consent of the residents but through nexus of management of RWA. They are using these projects to exhort more money from residents as well as siphon off money through civil and maintenance work. Unfortunately most residents are silent and paying instead of acting against these corrupt practices, which only motivates the RWA management to be bolder in their corrupt work.
RWAs are for a purpose but we see most of them working for individuals interest of management body - even at the cost of society funds and welfare of members.
ReplyDeleteFor example, RWA of Krishna Apra Residency (Block: E-8, Sector-61, NOIDA) - a group housing society, is taking a number of illegal decisions and exhorting money from residents. Most residents are busy in their work / offices and find little time to intervene. Given this scenario, RWA has started making structural changes in the society (in public / common space) such as a new gate for the society, changes in individual buildings, parking spaces etc. None of these are based on consent of the residents but through nexus of management of RWA. They are using these projects to exhort more money from residents as well as siphon off money through civil and maintenance work. Unfortunately most residents are silent and paying instead of acting against these corrupt practices, which only motivates the RWA management to be bolder in their corrupt work.
Absolutely right Amit. Though builders are usually blamed for creating trouble for the residents, it's not true in all cases. Purvanchal Silvercity II, Greater Noida, which has been in the news for all the wrong reasons for the past year-and-a-half, is one such society where the RWA - a nexus of few people - created chaos in the life of residents by registering false cases, misappropriation of funds without residents' consent, building a temple on common area etc. The latest is Rs 56 lakh dues to NPCL, which they didn't deposit with the power firm. The residents were unaware and kept paying for the prepaid system not realising that the money was going into the pockets of the RWA board members. They didn't spare the IFMS and took a Rs 65 lakh loan against the FD of a crore and used that money also. The HC has ordered elections but the residents are finding themselves with absolutely no money and massive NPCL dues staring in their faces!
ReplyDeleteबड़ा घोटाला किया है इन लोगो ने और अभी भी इनकी भूख मिटि नहीं है। उत्तर प्रदेश अपार्टमेंट एक्ट औऱ बाय-लॉज़ को ताख पे रख कर, इन लोगो ने:
ReplyDelete- सार्वजनिक जगह से कार पार्किंग बनाकर बेच दी
- अच्छे से बने मुख्य द्वार को तोड़ कर एक भद्दा, भौंडा और नियम के खिलाफ नया द्वार बनाया जो कि द्वार से ज्यादा चौकीदारों के आराम फरमाने का इंतजाम है
- सुरक्षा के नाम पर कैमरे और अन्य वाहियात यंत्रो को लगा दिया लेकिन एक कुत्ते को अन्दर आने से नहीं रोक पाते
सारा का सारा मामला भ्रस्टाचार का है | चंद लोभी और सभ्यता से परे लोग लूट करने में लगे हैं। ज्यादातर तो सो रहे हैं, कुछ इन भ्रस्टाचारी लोगो की चापलूसी में लिप्त हैं।
देवियों और सज्जनो, अपनी अन्तरात्मा में झाँक कर देखो। आप क्या कर रहे हो। अपनी संतानो को क्या शिझा दे रहे हो। सूट और टाई लगाने से आपका गन्दा शरीर और गन्दा मन नहीं छिपता है। साफ़ नज़र आता है कि आप किसी मनोवैज्ञानिक रोग से ग्रषित हो रहे हो।
If anyone is still following this post. Wanted to find out - What if there are multiple "say 100" flats. Does the builder get 100*proportionate area voting rights? Or is the builder's vote just counted as 1?
ReplyDeleteThis article introduced me to some fresh ideas. I love how clearly you explained everything
ReplyDeleteOnline Voting platform