advocatemmmohan

My photo

ADVOCATEMMMOHAN -  Practicing both IN CIVIL, CRIMINAL AND FAMILY LAWS,Etc.,

WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD

WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - FOR KNOWLEDGE IN LAW & FOR LEGAL OPINIONS - SHARE THIS

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Haryana Apartment Ownership Act,1983 (for short “the Apartment Act”) - Development Act - Declarations in respect of “common areas and facilities” - the owners cannot claim any undivided interest over those facilities except the right of user - they cannot claim an undivided interest or right of management over them.- agreements executed between the colonizer and the DTCP vis-à-vis the various provisions of the Apartment Act, the statutory declaration made by the colonizer and the Sale Deeds executed between the parties - Apex court set aside the judgment of the High Court and dismiss the writ petition filed before the High Court. The appeal is, therefore allowed. = DLF Limited ….. Appellant Versus Manmohan Lowe and others …..Respondents =published in http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgst.aspx?filename=41058

  Haryana Apartment  Ownership  Act,1983 (for short “the Apartment Act”) -  Development Act - Declarations in respect of “common areas and  facilities” - the owners cannot claim any  undivided interest over those facilities except  the  right  of  user - they  cannot claim an undivided interest or right of management over them.- agreements executed between the colonizer and the DTCP  vis-à-vis the  various  provisions  of  the  Apartment  Act,  the  statutory declaration made by the colonizer and the Sale Deeds executed  between the parties - Apex court set aside  the judgment of the High Court and dismiss the writ petition filed  before the High Court.  The appeal is,  therefore  allowed.  =
writ of certiorari  to quash the declaration dated 19.04.2001 filed by the Appellant,  on  the  ground  that  the  same  is  not  in conformity with Section 3(f) of the Haryana Apartment  Ownership  Act, 1983 (for short “the Apartment Act”) 
since  the  appellant  failed  to include certain areas of the complex as “common areas and  facilities”  within the declaration, thereby effectively  depriving  the  apartment
 owners of their rights over the same. =
The Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court accepted
      their contention and held that the apartment owners  are  entitled  to
      undivided interest in common areas and common facilities under Section
      6 of the Apartment Act and would be vitally affected  if  those  areas
      are not declared as common areas.  
The Court also  held,  inter  alia,
      that the competent authority under Section 3(i) of the  Apartment  Act
      is under an obligation to  decide  the  objections  of  the  apartment
      owners to the declaration filed  by  the  colonizer–appellant  herein.
      Aggrieved  by  the  same,  this  appeal  has  been  preferred  by  the
      colonizer. =
  
   We are also of the view that the High  Court  has  committed  an
      error in directing the DTCP to decide the objections of the  apartment
      owners with regard to the declaration  made  by  the  colonizer.   The
      Competent Authority is defined under Section  3(i)  of  the  Apartment
      Act.  Section 11(2) provides for filing of declaration in  the  office
      of the  Competent  Authority.   Section  24A  of  the  Act  prescribes
      penalties and prosecution  for  failure  to  file  a  declaration  and
      Section 24B permits the prosecution only  with  the  sanction  of  the
      Competent Authority.  
In a  given  case  if  the  developer  does  not
      provide  common  areas  or   facilities   like   corridors,   lobbies,
      staircases, lifts and fire escape etc.  the  Competent  Authority  can
      look into the objections of the apartment owners but when statute  has
      given a discretion to the colonizer to provide or not  to  provide  as
      per Section 3(f)(7) of the Apartment Act the facilities referred to in
      Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of Development Act, in our view no objection could
      be raised by the apartment owners and they cannot claim any  undivided
      interest over those facilities except  the  right  of  user.   In  the
      instant case the apartment owners have raised no grievance  that  they
      are being prevented from using the community and commercial facilities
      referred to in Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of Regulation Act, but they  cannot
      claim an undivided interest or right of management over them.


      44.   We may also refer to the  contention  raised  by  the  apartment
      owners  that  the  Judgment  in  DLF  Qutab  Enclave  (supra)  is  not
      applicable in view of the Haryana Development and Regulation of  Urban
      Areas (Management) Act, 2003 which came into force on 03.04.2003.   We
      have gone through the  amended  definition  of  “external  development
      works”.  By virtue of the amendment, the scope of the said  expression
      has been widened and the State Government has given a wider discretion
      in expending the amount  collected  from  the  colonizer  as  external
      development charges.  The Amendment Act does not seek to  transfer  an
      obligation of actually carrying out the external development work upon
      the colonizer.  The Statement of Objects and Reasons of  the  Bill  of
      2003 which led to the amendment  indicates  that  though  the  various
      decisions of the High Court have gone in favour of the Department, the
      amendment  was  necessitated   to   make   certain   provisions   more
      comprehensive.  In other words, the amendment has  no  effect  on  the
      Judgment of this Court in DLF Qutab Enclave (supra).


      45.   We are of  the  view  that  the  High  Court  has  not  properly
      appreciated  or  applied  the  various  statutory  provisions  of  the
      Regulation Act and the Rules framed thereunder, the terms of  licences
      issued, agreements executed between the colonizer and the DTCP  vis-à-
      vis the  various  provisions  of  the  Apartment  Act,  the  statutory
      declaration made by the colonizer and the Sale Deeds executed  between
      the parties.  In such circumstances, we are inclined to set aside  the
      judgment of the High Court and dismiss the writ petition filed  before
      the High Court.  The appeal is,  therefore  allowed.   However,  there
      will be no order as  to  costs.   Applications  for  intervention  are
      allowed.


                            

         REPORTABLE


                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                       CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10930 OF 2013
             (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.34275 of 2009)


      DLF Limited                                  ….. Appellant


                                   Versus


      Manmohan Lowe and others                       …..Respondents


                                    WITH


        Contempt Petition (Civil) No.         of 2013 (D.No.29500/12)
                                     IN
                       CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10930 OF 2013
             (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.34275 of 2009)




      DLF Limited                                  ….. Petitioner


                                   Versus


      B. Jaishankar & Ors.                           …..Respondents


                               J U D G M E N T


      K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.


            Leave granted.
      2.    This appeal arises out of a writ petition filed by the Apartment
      owners of Silver Oaks Apartments, DLF Qutub Enclave, Phase-1, Gurgaon,
      seeking a writ of certiorari 
to quash the declaration dated 19.04.2001
      filed by the Appellant,  on  the  ground  that  the  same  is  not  in
      conformity with Section 3(f) of the Haryana Apartment  Ownership  Act,
      1983 (for short “the Apartment Act”) 
since  the  appellant  failed  to
      include certain areas of the complex as “common areas and  facilities”
      within the declaration, thereby effectively  depriving  the  apartment
      owners of their rights over the same.


      3.    The Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court accepted
      their contention and held that the apartment owners  are  entitled  to
      undivided interest in common areas and common facilities under Section
      6 of the Apartment Act and would be vitally affected  if  those  areas
      are not declared as common areas.  
The Court also  held,  inter  alia,
      that the competent authority under Section 3(i) of the  Apartment  Act
      is under an obligation to  decide  the  objections  of  the  apartment
      owners to the declaration filed  by  the  colonizer–appellant  herein.
      Aggrieved  by  the  same,  this  appeal  has  been  preferred  by  the
      colonizer.


      4.    The colonizer  purchased  large  extent  of  lands  in  villages
      Chakarpur, Sarhaul, Shahpur, Nathupur and  Sikanderpur  Ghosi,  Tehsil
      and District Gurgaon, Haryana, with a view to  develop  a  residential
      colony to be known  as  DLF  Qutab  Enclave  Complex.   
Any  intending
      company or association having land for converting it  in  the  colony,
      was required to apply for licence under the  Haryana  Development  and
      Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 (for short ‘the Development Act’).
     
The colonizer submitted an application in accordance with  Section  3
      of the Development Act for necessary licences.  During the years 1980-
      81 seven licences were obtained by the Colonizer in relation to 130.62
      acres.  Licences were  granted  by  the  Director,  Town  and  Country
      Planning, Haryana (DTCP) in accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the
      Development Act.  The Department of Town and Country Planning, Haryana
      (the Department) in the year 1982 approved the group  complex,  Silver
      Oaks, as  part  of  the  colony  being  developed  by  the  Colonizer.
      Licences  were  initially  granted  for  two  years,  and  later   got
      periodically renewed.  On 30.05.1990 a condition was  imposed  by  the
      Competent Authority that the  Colonizer  should  provide  Economically
      Weaker Sections Complex (EWS) and service units to the extent  of  10%
      of main dwelling units.
Consequently,  revised  plan  was  submitted,
      which was approved by the Competent Authority on 08.11.1990  in  which
      residential blocks comprising parking in basement, EWS Flats and three
      shops were approved.   There  was  further  revision  for  zoning  and
      building plan in the years 1992 and 1995.


      5.    The Department, in the meantime, circulated norms for  provision
      of community facilities vide DTCP  Endst  No.20028  dated  24.11.1988.
      During the  year  1990,  agreements  were  entered  into  between  the
      Colonizer and the Apartment Owners  of  the  above-mentioned  complex.
      Apartment buyers agreement provided for sale of  a  quantified  ‘super
      area’ against the sale consideration specified in the agreement.   The
      ‘super area’ comprises of an exclusive right to use  the  common  area
      within the building in which the apartment  was  situated.   Agreement
      also states that the colonizer will transfer  and  convey  its  right,
      title and interest in the said site, common area and common facilities
      in  favour  of  the  co-operative  society  or  limited   company   or
      association of persons, etc. in accordance with the provisions of  the
      Apartment Act and the Rules framed thereunder.


      6.    The  Colonizer  later  applied  for  completion  certificate  on
      15.04.1996 for  group  housing  scheme  measuring  14.75  acres.   The
      Apartment Act, though was enforced by notification  dated  08.09.1986,
      issued by the Haryana Department, the same was rescinded on 24.10.1997
      as the concerned department  which  notified  the  Act  was  the  Town
      Planning  Department.   Consequently,  a  fresh   notification   dated
      10.11.1997 was issued by the Department notifying the applicability of
      the Act in the entire State of Haryana.  Later several sale deeds were
      executed by the Colonizer in favour of the  apartment  owners  in  the
      year 1997, wherein both had agreed that  they  would  conform  to  the
      provisions of the Apartment Act.  Writ Petition  No.960  of  2000  was
      filed by respondents 1 to 5, before the Punjab & Haryana  High  Court,
      seeking a direction to the Colonizer to file a deed of declaration  in
      relation to the Complex under the Apartment Act.


      7.    The Department later gave a partial  completion  certificate  to
      the Colonizer on 22.01.2001, subject to the condition of filing a deed
      of declaration under the Apartment Act  within  90  days.   Later  the
      Department  on  14.03.2001  revised  the  earlier  partial  completion
      certificate for the complex, inter alia, requiring  the  Colonizer  to
      file a deed of declaration within a period of 90 days.   It  was  also
      provided that the responsibility of the ownership of common areas  and
      common facilities as well as their management and  maintenance  should
      continue to vest with the Colonizer till such time the  responsibility
      was transferred to the statutory  condominium  association  under  the
      Apartment Act.  The Colonizer  accordingly  on  19.04.2001  filed  the
      “deed of declaration” along with bye-laws of the statutory condominium
      association (Silver Oaks Condominium Association for short ‘the SOCA’)
      as required under Section 11(2) of the Apartment Act.   The  Colonizer
      on 20.04.2001 issued a  letter  to  the  SOCA  stating  that  all  the
      dwelling units, areas, with the common areas and facilities along with
      other assets, plant and machinery and equipments, as declared  in  the
      declaration stands transferred to the SOCA for the  maintenance.   The
      Colonizer on 23.04.2001 also wrote a letter  to  the  SOCA  requesting
      them to take over the responsibility of maintaining common  areas  and
      facilities along with other assets, plant and machinery and equipments
      etc.


      8.    The SOCA on 27.04.2001 passed a resolution that  it  would  take
      over the responsibility of managing of  common  areas  and  facilities
      along with other assets, plants and machinery and other equipments, as
      transferred to  the  Association  by  the  Colonizer.   The  same  was
      confirmed by the Association by sending a letter on 03.05.2001 to  the
      Colonizer.


      9.    Writ Petition No.960 of 2000, filed by respondents 1  to  5  was
      later amended, challenging the declaration  filed  by  the  Colonizer,
      stating that the same was not in conformity with the  mandate  of  the
      Apartment Act, and that the common areas and  facilities  should  also
      include shops or parking areas, community centers, nursery school  and
      other common facilities.  Amendment sought was  allowed  by  the  High
      Court on 26.11.2001.  Before the High Court Silver  Oak  Society  also
      got themselves impleaded as party.  The High Court also impleaded  the
      statutory SOCA as a party respondent to the writ petition.   The  High
      Court also sought a clarification from the Department with  regard  to
      the  meaning  of  expression  “common  areas  and  facilities”.    The
      Department clarified that the “common  areas  and  common  facilities”
      need to be defined categorically in the declaration to be filed  under
      Section 2 of the Apartment Act which may or may not include  community
      buildings, shops etc.


      10.   The Division Bench of the  High  Court  after  hearing  all  the
      parties took the view that the question whether primary schools, shops
      or community center are common areas or any  other  objection  of  the
      flat owners could be decided by the Competent Authority, having regard
      to the provisions, objects and spirit of the Act.  Further, the  Court
      also took the view that it is not the  intention  of  the  Legislature
      that the developer/Colonizer assumes absolute power  of  declaring  or
      not declaring areas, normally in common use, to be common areas.   The
      Court also held that Section 11, which deals with the contents of  the
      declaration,  cannot  be  read  as  giving  absolute  power   to   the
      Colonizer/developer to exclude common areas  from  the  said  concept.
      The Court also held that the apartment owners are entitled  to  object
      to the contents of  the  declaration  and  it  is  for  the  Competent
      Authority to decide cross-objections.  The  Court  after  holding  so,
      disposed of the writ  petition  with  a  direction  to  the  Competent
      Authority to take a decision on the various objections raised  by  the
      apartment owners and the association.  The legality of  which  is  the
      question that arises for consideration in this appeal.


      11.   Shri Mukul Rohatgi, learned senior  counsel  appearing  for  the
      Colonizer, submitted that the High Court has completely  misunderstood
      the scope of various provisions of the Development Act and  the  Rules
      framed thereunder as well as the Apartment Act, and the  Rules  framed
      thereunder.
Learned senior counsel submitted that the judgment of the
      High  Court  has  the  effect  of  rendering  the  provisions  of  the
      Development Act, particularly,   Section 3(3)(a)(iv) otiose in as much
      as it compels the Colonizer to divest its ownership rights in relation
      to community and commercial facilities developed by it in terms of the
      provision  of  the  Development  Act.   
Learned  senior  counsel  also
      submitted that the direction of the High Court  that  the  declaration
      must categorise the whole property into “apartment, common  areas  and
      facilities” and “limited common areas and facilities” is  contrary  to
      Section 3(f) of the Apartment Act,  which  itself,  according  to  the
      learned senior counsel, does not compel the Colonizer  to  divest  its
      ownership rights in community and common facilities developed by it as
      part of the obligation under  the  Development  Act.
 Learned  senior
      counsel also submitted that the High Court has  failed  to  appreciate
      that the community and commercial facilities, in SOCA,  were  provided
      as  part  of  the  Colonizer’s  over  all  obligations  under  Section
      3(3)(a)(iv) of the Development Act for the colony as a whole  and  the
      same cannot be considered separate only on account of being located at
      a specific site in the colony i.e. inside  the  Silver  Oaks  Complex.
      Learned senior counsel placed considerable reliance on the Judgment of
      this Court in  DLF Qutub Enclave Complex Educational Charitable  Trust
      v. State of Haryana and others (2003) 5 SCC  622  and  submitted  that
      community facilities and amenities are not part  of  the  “development
      work” under the Development Act.


      12.   Shri Vikas Singh,  learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the
      applicants in IA No.4 of 2013, supported the  Colonizer’s  contentions
      and also submitted that the High Court has  not  properly  appreciated
      the scope of Section  3(f)  of  the  Apartment  Act.   Learned  senior
      counsel pointed out that the expression “unless the  context  requires
      in the declaration” or “lawful amendments thereto” which finds a place
      in Section 3(f) of the Act has been completely overlooked by the  High
      Court.  Learned senior counsel also submitted that  the  Colonizer  is
      not under an obligation either under the conditions of  licence  under
      the Development Act or under the provisions of the  Apartment  Act  to
      declare certain areas to be common areas and facilities.


      13.    Mr.  Narender  Hooda,  learned  Additional  Advocate   General,
      Haryana, appearing for  the  State  of  Haryana,  submitted  that  the
      internal community facilities are  required  to  be  provided  by  the
      colonizer in terms of Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the Development  Act,  at
      his own cost and the expenditure incurred cannot be passed on  to  the
      apartment owners and colonizer continues to be the exclusive owner  of
      such community facilities and is free to incorporate or  not,  any  or
      all such internal community facilities in the declaration required  to
      be filed in terms of the Apartment Act.
Learned  AAG  also  submitted
      that in the instant case Silver Oaks is a part of a  large  colony  of
      130 acres and the same cannot be treated as an independent colony  but
      only a portion of large colony of 130 acres.  Further  it  is  pointed
      out that all community facilities provided in the colony of 130  acres
      of which Silver Oaks is only  one  part  is  meant  for  the  use  and
      enjoyment of all the residents of the colony.


      14.   Shri T.R. Andhiyarujina, learned senior  counsel  appearing  for
      the applicants in IA No.3 of 2010 submitted that  the  High  Court  is
      right in holding that the intention of the  legislature  is  that  the
      Colonizer cannot be conferred with an absolute power to declare or not
      to declare areas normally in common use, to be common areas.   Learned
      senior counsel submitted that apartment owners are always entitled  to
      object to the contents of the declaration if the contents are  not  in
      conformity with the statutory provisions and spirit of  the  Apartment
      Act.  Learned senior counsel submitted that the High  Court  has  only
      directed the Competent Authority to examine the objections  raised  by
      the apartment owners and it is for the Competent Authority  to  decide
      as to whether the declaration is in conformity with the Apartment  Act
      and the Rules and Regulations framed thereunder.


      15.   Mrs. Madhu Tewatia, learned counsel appearing for the SOCA, took
      us extensively to the provisions of the Apartment  Ownership  Act  and
      the Rules framed thereunder  and  submitted  that  the  group  housing
      complexes are totally independent and  distinct  entity  in  terms  of
      sanctions, applicability of development, control, norms etc. vis-à-vis
      plotted colonies.  Learned counsel also submitted  that  the  internal
      development work shall  include  common  facilities  in  the  building
      complex,  for  example,  common   sewerage,   water   supply,   common
      staircases, corridors, ramps, lifts, chutes  etc.  and  the  community
      buildings are in  addition  to  the  provisions  of  development  work
      mentioned in Rule 5 of Development  Rules,  1976.   Referring  to  the
      licence agreement under the Development Act, learned  counsel  pointed
      out that the common areas and facilities do not vest or belong to  the
      builder and the  responsibility  of  ownership  or  common  areas  and
      facilities, as well as their management, shall continue to  vest  with
      the Colonizer only till  the  responsibility  is  transferred  to  the
      owners of the dwelling units under the Apartment Act.


      16.   Learned counsel also submitted that the development charges  and
      construction work in the colony are paid for by the apartment  owners.
      Learned counsel also  referred  to  the  Judgment  of  this  Court  in
      Naharchand Laloochand Private Limited v. Panchali Co-operative Housing
      Socities Limited  (2010) 9 SCC 536, and  submitted  that  this  Court,
      while  interpreting  para-materia  definition  of  common  areas   and
      facilities held that parking area, common area and facilities and that
      even the factum of not having taken money from  the  apartment  owners
      could not change the character and nature of common area  even  though
      the builder may not have charged.
 Learned counsel also submitted that
      Judgment in DLF Qutub Enclave (supra) can be  distinguished  on  facts
      and law and is not applicable to the case on hand since in the instant
      case, learned counsel submits, this Court is concerned with the  group
      housing multi-storied society unlike plotted colonies.


      17.   Shri Santosh Paul, learned counsel appearing for the  applicants
      in IA No.5 of 2013, submitted  that  the  Colonizer/Developer  in  the
      State of Haryana have with impunity violated  the  provisions  of  the
      Apartment Act.
Learned counsel submitted that under Section 6 of  the
      Act each apartment owner is  entitled  to  an  undivided  interest  in
      common areas and facilities and that percentage of undivided  interest
      of common areas and facilities shall  be  deemed  to  be  conveyed  or
      encumbered with  the  apartment  even  though  such  interest  is  not
      expressly mentioned in the conveyance or instrument.
 Learned counsel
      also made reference to the licence  format  LC-7  and  other  relevant
      provisions of the Development Act as well as  the  Apartment  Act  and
      submitted that the  Developer/Colonizer  having  connivance  with  the
      authorities  taken  shelter  under  Section  3(1)   to   sustain   for
      profiteering.
 Learned counsel, therefore, submitted that there is  no
      reason to upset the findings recorded by the High Court which  are  in
      tune with the over all public interest  so  that  the  rights  of  the
      vulnerable sections of the  society  would  be  safeguarded  from  the
      colonizers.


      18.   We find that the issue involved in this case is of  considerable
      importance in the real estate sector, especially in the  urban  areas,
      while developing a Scheme in connection with the plot  development  or
      group housing, hence, it is necessary to  examine  the  various  legal
      issues which arise for consideration  in  this  appeal.   
The  primary
question that has come up for consideration  is  with  regard  to  the rights  of  the  apartment  owners,  vis-à-vis  the  colonizers   over “community and commercial facilities” referred to in  Section  3(f)(7) of the Apartment Act.


      19.   Apartments owners, as already stated, maintained the stand  that
      “community  and  commercial  facilities”,  like  providing   community
      centre,  schools,  shops  etc.,  would  fall  within   the   statutory
      definition of “common areas and facilities” under Section 3(f) of  the
      Apartment Act.   The colonizers maintained the stand that it can be so
      only if the colonizer has provided so  in  the  statutory  declaration
      filed by it under Section 3(f) of the Apartment Act.


      20.   We are, in this case, concerned with the rights and  obligations
      which flow to a colonizer, vis-à-vis,  the  apartment  owners  on  the
      basis of the Development Act as well as the Apartment  Act.  
Let  us
      first examine the relevant provisions of the Development Act.


  The Development Act:


      21.   Section 2(c) of the Development Act defines the  term  “colony”,
      which reads as follows:
           “2(c) “colony” means an area of land divided or proposed  to  be
           divided  into  plots  or  flats  for  residential,   commercial,
           industrial, cyber  city  or  cyber  park  purposes  or  for  the
           construction of flats in the form of group housing  or  for  the
           construction of integrated commercial complexes, but an area  of
           land divided or proposed to be divided-


              i) for the purpose of agriculture; or
           (ii)  as a result of family partition,  inheritance,  succession
                 or partition of  joint  holding  not  with  the  motive  or
                 earning profit; or


             ii) in furtherance of any scheme sanction under any other  law;
                 or


            iii) by the owner of a factory for setting up a  housing  colony
                 for the labour or the employees  working  in  the  factory;
                 provided there is no profit motive; or


             iv) when it does not exceed one thousand square metres or  such
                 less area as may be decided from time to time in  an  urban
                 area by Government for the  purposes  of  this  sub-clause,
                 shall not be a colony.”



      The expression “colonizer” is defined under Section 2(d) which reads
      as follows :-

           “2(d). "colonizer" means an individual, company  or  association
           or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not, owning land
           for converting it into a colony and to whom a licence  has  been
           granted under this Act.”



      The expression “development works” is defined under  Section  2(e)  of
      the Act to mean as “internal and external development works”.  Section
      2(g) defines the expression “external development works” and reads  as
      follows:
           “2(g).  “External  development  works”  include  water   supply,
           sewerage, drains, necessary provisions of treatment and disposal
           of sewage, sullage and storm  water,  roads,  electrical  works,
           solid waste management and disposal, slaughter houses, colleges,
           hospitals, stadium/sports  complex,  fire  stations,  grid  sub-
           stations etc. and any other work which the Director may  specify
           to be executed in the periphery of or  outside  colony/area  for
           the benefit of the colony/area.”


      The word “flat” is defined under Section  2(gg)  of  the  Act,  which
      reads as follows:
           “2(gg). “Flat” means a part of any property, intended to be used
           for residential purposes,  including  one  or  more  rooms  with
           enclosed spaces located on one or more floors, with direct  exit
           to a public street or road or to a common area leading  to  such
           streets or roads and includes any garage or room whether or  not
           adjacent to the building in which such flat is located  provided
           by the colonizer/owner of such property for use by the owner  of
           such flat for parking any vehicle or for residence of any person
           employed in such flat, as the case may be.”


      The expression “group housing” is defined under Section 2(hh)  of  the
      Development Act, which reads as follows:
           “2(hh).      “Group  housing”  means  a  building  designed  and
           developed in the form of flats for residential  purpose  or  any
           ancillary   or   appurtenant   building   including    community
           facilities, public  amenities  and  public  utility  as  may  be
           prescribed.”




      Section 2(hhh) defines the expression “integrated commercial complex”,
      which reads as follows :-

           “2(hhh).    “integrated  commercial  complex”   means   building
           containing apartments sharing common services and facilities and
           having their undivided share in the land and meant  to  be  used
           for office or for practicing of any profession or  for  carrying
           on any  occupation,  trade,  business  or  such  other  type  of
           independent use, as may be prescribed.”


      The expression “internal development works” is defined  under  Section
      2(i), which reads as follows:
           “2(i).   “Internal development works” mean –


              i) metalling of roads and paving of footpaths;


             ii) turfing and plantation with trees of open spaces;


            iii) street lighting;


             iv) adequate and wholesome water-supply;


              v) sewers and drains both from storm  and  sullage  water  and
                 necessary provision for their treatment and disposal; and


             vi) any other work that the Director may think necessary in the
                 interest of proper development of a colony.”


      Section 3 of the Development Act deals with application  for  licence,
      which reads as follows :-
          “3.    Application  for  licence.-  (1)  Any  owner  desiring  to
          convert his land into  a  colony  shall,  unless  exempted  under
          section 9, make an application to the Director, for the grant  of
          licence to develop a colony in the prescribed form and pay for it
          such fee  and  conversion  charges  as  may  be  prescribed.  The
          application shall  be  accompanied  by  an  income-tax  clearance
          certificate;


          Provided that if the conversion charges have  already  been  paid
          under the provisions of the Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled
          Area Restriction of Unregulated  Development  Act,  1963  (41  of
          1963), no such charges shall be payable under this section.


          (2) On receipt of the application  under  sub  section  (1),  the
          Director shall, among other things, enquire  into  the  following
          matters, namely:-


           (a)   title to the land;


           (b)   extent and situation of the land;


           (c)   capacity to develop a colony;


           (d)   the layout of a colony;


           (e)   plan regarding the development schemes of the colony  land
                 to those of the neighbouring areas.


           (f)   conformity of the development schemes of the  colony  land
                 to those of the neighbouring areas.


           (3)   After the enquiry under sub-section (2), the Director,  by
           an order in writing, shall –


           (a)    grant  a  licence  in  the  prescribed  form,  after  the
                 applicant  has furnished to the Director a  bank  guarantee
                 equal  to twenty five per centum of the estimated  cost  of
                 development works in  case  of  area  of  land  divided  or
                 proposed to be divided into plots or flats for residential,
                 commercial or industrial  purposes  and  a  bank  guarantee
                 equal  to  thirty-seven  and  a  half  per  centum  of  the
                 estimated cost of development works in case of  cyber  city
                 or cyber park purposes as certified by the director and has
                 undertaken-


                 (i)   to enter into an agreement in the prescribed form for
                 carrying  out  and  completion  of  development  works   in
                 accordance with licence granted;


                 (ii)  to  pay  proportionate  development  charges  if  the
                 external development works as  defined  in  clause  (g)  of
                 section 2 are to be carried out by the  Government  or  any
                 other local authority. The proportion in which and the time
                 within  which,  such  payment  is  to  be  made,  shall  be
                 determined by the Director;


                 (iii)       the  responsibility  for  the  maintenance  and
                 upkeep  of  all  roads,  open  spaces,  public   park   and
                 public health services for a period  of five years from the
                 date of issue of the completion certificate unless  earlier
                 relieved of this responsibility and thereupon  to  transfer
                 all such roads, open spaces, public parks and public health
                 services free of  cost  to  the  Government  or  the  local
                 authority, as the case may be;


                 (iv)  to construct at his own cost, or get  constructed  by
                 any other institution or individual at its  cost,  schools,
                 hospitals, community centers and other community  buildings
                 on the lands set apart for this purpose, or to transfer  to
                 the  Government  at  any  time,  if  so  desired   by   the
                 Government, free of cost the land set apart  for   schools,
                 hospitals, community centers and  community  buildings,  in
                 which case the Government shall  be at liberty to  transfer
                 such land to any person or institutions including  a  local
                 authority on such terms and conditions as it may deem fit;


                    v)  to  permit  the  Director  or  any   other   officer
                       authorized  by him to inspect the  execution  of  the
                       layout and the development works in the colony and to
                       carry out all  directions issued by him for  ensuring
                       due compliance of the execution  of  the  layout  and
                       development works  in  accordance  with  the  licence
                       granted;


                 Provided that the Director, having regard to the  amenities
                 which exist or are proposed to be provided in the locality,
                 is of the opinion that it is not necessary or  possible  to
                 provide one or more such amenities, may exempt the licensee
                 from providing such amenities either wholly or in part;


                 (vi)  to fulfill  such  terms  and  conditions  as  may  be
                 specified by the director at the time of grant  of  license
                 through bilateral agreement as may be prescribed.


           (b)   refuse to grant a licence, by means of a  speaking  order,
                 after affording  the  applicant  an  opportunity  of  being
                 heard.


           4.    the license so granted shall be valid for a period of  two
           years, and will be renewable from time to time for a period  of
           one year, on payment of prescribed fee:


           Provided that in the licensed  colony  permitted  as  a  special
           project by the Government, the license  shall  be  valid  for  a
           maximum period of five years and shall be renewable for a period
           as decided by the Government.”



      22.   The  colonizer,  in  the  instant  case,  has  entered  into  an
      agreement LC-IVA under Rule 11 of the Development Rules, 1976, whereby
      the colonizer has agreed to comply  with  the  execution  of  internal
      development works, external development works and to construct at  his
      own cost, community centers, community buildings,  schools,  hospitals
      etc. in the areas earmarked for the same in the  layout  plan  of  the
      colony.  
Internal  development  works  are  to  be  executed  by  the
      colonizer between boundaries of the licensed colony and  the  cost  of
      the  internal  development  works,  to  be  recovered  from  the  plot
      holders/apartment owners in the colony.   
External  development  works
      are works required to be executed at the periphery of  the  colony  or
      outside the colony limits which are of  larger  and  more  substantial
      nature and meant to serve the needs of a larger area than  one  colony
      like  town  level  infrastructure  work  facilities  etc.  
 External
      development works,  which  includes  water  supply,  sewerage,  roads,
      electrical  works,  solid   waste   management   disposal,   colleges,
      hospitals, stadium etc. are to be executed exclusively  by  the  State
      Government and not by the  colonizer.
Section  3(3)(a)(ii)  and  the
      statutory agreement to be entered into between the colonizer  and  the
      State Government would indicate that colonizer is required to  deposit
      with the Government the entire cost of external development  works  as
      quantified by the State Government, cost of the same invariably passed
      on by the colonizer to the plot holders/apartments owners on  pro-rata
      basis.
Further, the responsibility for the maintenance and upkeep  of
      all roads, open spaces, public parks and public health services for  a
      period of five years is on the Colonizer from the date of issue of the
      completion certificate.


      23.   We may now examine the most crucial issue  with  regard  to  the
      scope of Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the Development Act.  As per the  said
      provision, an obligation is cast on the colonizer to construct “at its
      own cost” or get constructed by any other institution or an individual
      at its own cost,  schools,  hospitals,  community  centers  and  other
      community buildings on the land set apart for the  said  purpose.   In
      the alternative, the colonizer can also transfer to the Government, at
      any time, if so decided by the Government, free of cost, the land  set
      apart  for  schools,  hospitals,  community  centers   and   community
      buildings, in which case,  the  Government  shall  be  at  liberty  to
      transfer such land to any person or  institution,  including  a  local
      authority on such terms and conditions, as it may deem fit.   In  such
      situation,  the  cost  of  construction  can  either  be  met  by  the
      Government or by the transferee of the Government.  The cost  incurred
      in discharging the obligations under Section 3(3)(a)(iv),  as  already
      indicated, has to be borne either by the colonizer or, on transfer  of
      the land free of cost, by the Government or the Government transferee.
       The cost incurred for construction, in that event, cannot  be  passed
      on or recovered from the plot holders/apartment owners in the  colony.




      24.   Section 3(3)(a)(iv) obliges the colonizer to  construct  at  his
      own cost schools, hospitals, community centers and other buildings  on
      the lands set apart for that purpose, or also can get them constructed
      by any other institution or an individual, at its own  cost,  but  the
      ownership of land set apart for the said purpose  continues  with  the
      colonizer.  Option is also provided under Section 3(3)(a)(iv)  to  the
      colonizer to transfer to the Government, at any time, if so desired by
      the Government,  free  of  cost,  the  land  set  apart  for  schools,
      hospitals, community centers and community buildings, in  which  case,
      the Government shall be at liberty to transfer such land to any person
      or  institution,  including  a  local  authority  on  such  terms  and
      conditions as it may deem fit.   But, the ownership of  the  Colonizer
      cannot be transferred or divested, unless the colonizer volunteers  to
      transfer the same free of cost to the Government.  The  colonizer  has
      taken a specific ground in this appeal that  even  before  filing  the
      writ petition, they had already transferred its right to construct two
      nursery schools, community center and the shops in Silver  Oaks  Group
      Housing to third parties and it is for the third parties to  construct
      the same, though ownership of the land vests with the colonizer.


      25.    Community  and  other  facilities  like   schools,   hospitals,
      community centers, shops etc. provided in the  land  set  apart  under
      Section 3(3)(a)(iv) are, therefore,  meant  for  the  benefit  of  the
      entire colony and not for the apartment owners  in  one  part  of  the
      colony  and  the  costs  incurred  in  discharge  of   the   statutory
      obligations  cannot   be   passed   on/transferred   from   the   plot
      owners/apartment owners  by  the  colonizer.   The  facilities  to  be
      provided under Section 3(3)(a)(iv) are based on the  prescribed  norms
      which are population based and the number of each type of amenity  and
      its placement at various places in the colony (plotted areas or  group
      housing) are, as per the lay-out plans duly approved by the DTCP under
      the Development Act.   DTCP has prescribed the  requirement  for  each
      amenity/commercial facility for DLF City Phase I, II & III, comprising
      of a total area of 1542 acres, under a composite layout  plan  of  all
      the three phases, treating three phases as a single  colony.   As  per
      the approved layout plans, these amenities are  earmarked  at  various
      sites in the colony, some in the plotted areas and some in  the  group
      housing areas.   So far as the present case is  concerned,  we  notice
      that the layout  plans  pertaining  to  lands  covered  under  various
      licenses in the colony are not restricted to 130 acres alone,  wherein
      Silver Oaks Group Housing is located in 14.75 acres.


      26.   In Ansal Properties and Industries Limited. V. State of  Haryana
      and Another (2009) 3 SCC 553, this Court had occasion to  examine  the
      scope of Section 3(3)(a)(iv) along with the Regulations Act.  In  that
      case, the Court held as follows:


           “42. The  responsibility  regarding  construction  of  community
           centres and other community buildings  could  be  discharged  by
           adopting any of the three options as mentioned hereinbefore  and
           each one of such options is an independent option and one cannot
           be connected and related with the  other.  We  cannot  read  the
           provision relating to  construction  at  the  own  cost  of  the
           developer the schools, hospitals, community  centres  and  other
           community buildings on the land set apart for this purpose, into
           an independent alternative provision  relating  to  transfer  of
           such land to the Government free of cost. The  aforesaid  option
           given to the developer to construct the  community  centres  and
           other community buildings at its own cost is when he can utilise
           himself to manage it. Therefore, we cannot  read  the  aforesaid
           provision in the manner sought to be read by Mr  Chaudhari,  for
           reading by adding certain words in the aforesaid manner does not
           appear to be the intention of the legislature while enacting the
           aforesaid legislation, for otherwise the legislature would  have
           explicitly said so in the body of the main part of  the  section
           itself.


      In that case, the State Government  sought  to  recover  the  cost  of
      construction over the land set apart for  providing  facilities  which
      were taken over by the Government as  part  of  “external  development
      charges”.  This Court held that Section 3(3)(a)(iv) only provides  for
      the land to be transferred to the State and no provision  of  the  Act
      authorizes the State Government to recover  charges  towards  cost  of
      construction.


      27.   Later, in DLF Qutub Enclave Complex Educational Charitable Trust
      v. State of Haayana and Others (2003) 5 SCC 622,  while  dealing  with
      the scope of  the  above  mentioned  provision,  this  Court  held  as
      follows:


           “34. At the outset, we may notice that the cost  of  development
           works indisputably is to be raised from the plot-holders, but as
           construction of schools, hospitals, community centres and  other
           community buildings do not come within the purview of  the  term
           “development works”, the costs therefore are not to be borne  by
           them.


           35. The expression “development works” as  noticed  hereinbefore
           is not synonymous with “amenity”. The expression  “amenity”  has
           been used only in the proviso  appended  to  sub-clause  (v)  of
           Section  3(3)(a)  and  Rule  2(b)  of  the  Rules.   Rules   are
           subservient to the Act, although they  may  be  read  conjointly
           with the Act, if any necessity  arises  therefor.  Even  Rule  5
           specifies the obligation of the colonizer  as  regard  providing
           for the development works. The expression “amenity”  as  defined
           in Rule 2(b) of the Rules is wider than “development works”.  No
           principle of construction  of  statute  suggests  that  a  wider
           expression used in the rule may be read in the statute employing
           narrower expression. Even in the rule the said expressions  have
           been used for different purposes.  The  licence  also  does  not
           postulate that all amenities must be provided by  the  colonizer
           at its  own  expense.  If  the  terms  “development  works”  and
           “amenity” are treated as carrying the same  meaning,  the  plot-
           holders  may  be  held  to  be  bound  to  meet  the  costs  for
           construction of schools, hospitals, community centres  etc.  The
           cost of construction in terms of the said provisions thereof  is
           to be borne by DLF or its nominees.


           36. Right of transfer of land is indisputably incidental to  the
           right of ownership. Such a right can be curtailed or taken  away
           only by reason of a statute. An embargo upon the  owner  of  the
           land to transfer the same in the opinion of  this  Court  should
           not be readily inferred. Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the Act does not
           expressly impose any restriction. The same is merely a  part  of
           an undertaking. …..”


      28.   We have to now examine the rights of apartment owners  over  the
      facilities referred to in Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the  Development  Act
      in the light of the Apartment Act.  As already indicated,  it  is  the
      obligation of the colonizer to construct  schools,  community  centers
      and commercial facilities on the lands set apart for that  purpose  in
      the colony under Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the Development Act  and  also
      on the basis of agreement executed between the colonizer and the DTCP.
        No obligation is cast on the colonizer under the  Apartment  Act  or
      the Rules framed there under to  provide  those  facilities  which  are
      specifically mentioned under Section 3(3)(a)(iv)  of  the  Development
      Act.  But the Colonizer has to provide various other  facilities  like
      “common areas and facilities”, to the apartment  owners,  as  provided
      under the Apartment Act.   In this regard, reference may  be  made  to
      certain provisions of the Apartment Act.

      The Apartment Act:

      29.    Section  3(a)  of  the  Apartment  Act  deals  with  the   word
      “apartment”, which reads as follows:

           “3(a).        “Apartment” means a part of the property  intended
           for any type of independent use, including one or more rooms  or
           enclosed spaces located on one or more floors or part  or  parts
           thereof, in a building, intended  to  be  used  for  residential
           purposes and with a direct exit to  a  public  street,  road  or
           highway or to a common area leading  to  such  street,  road  or
           highway.”


      Section 3(b) defines  the  term  “apartment  owner”  which  reads  as
      follows:
           “3(b) “Apartment owner” means the person or  persons  owning  an
           apartment  and  undivided  interest  in  the  common  areas  and
           facilities in the percentage specified and  established  in  the
           declaration.”


      Section 3(f) defines the term “common  areas  and  facilities”  which
      reads as follows:
           “3(f) “Common areas and facilities: unless otherwise provided in
           the declaration or lawful amendments thereto means-


           1) the land on which the building is located;


           2) the foundations,  columns,  girders,  beams,  supports,  main
              walls, roofs, halls, corridors, lobbies, stairs, stair  ways,
              fire escapes and entrances and exits of the building;


           3) the basements, cellars,  yards,  gardens,  parking  area  and
              storage spaces;


           4) the premises for the lodging of janitors or persons  employed
              for management of the property;


           5) installation of central services such as power,  light,  gas,
              hot and cold water, heating refrigeration,  air  conditioning
              and incinerating;


           6) the elevators, tanks, pumps, motors, fans compressors,  ducts
              and in general all apparatus and installations  existing  for
              common use;


           7) such community and commercial facilities as may  be  provided
              for in the declaration; and


           8) all other parts of the property necessary  or  convenient  to
              its existing maintenance and safety  or  normally  in  common
              use.”




      Section 3(h)  defines  the  term  “common  profits”  which  reads  as
      follows:
           “3(h). “Common profits” means the balance of all income,  rents,
           profits and  revenues  from  the  common  areas  and  facilities
           remaining after the deduction of the common expenses.”


      Section 3(j) defines the word “declaration” which reads as under;
           “3(j).            “Declaration”  means  the  instrument  to   be
           executed and got registered in the prescribed form and  includes
           the amended declaration.”


      Section 4 of the Act deals with  the  “status  of  apartments”  which
      reads as under:
           “4. Status of apartments.-  Each apartment,  together  with  its
           undivided  interest  in  the  common   areas   and   facilities,
           appurtenant to such apartment, shall for all purposes constitute
           heritable and transferable immovable property within the meaning
           of any law for the time being in force in the State of Haryana.”


      Section 5 of the Act deals with “Ownership of apartments” which reads
      as follows:
           ‘5. Ownership of apartments.-  (1) Each apartment owner shall be
           entitled to  the  exclusive  ownership  and  possession  of  his
           apartment in accordance with the declaration.


           (2) Each apartment owner shall execute a deed  of  apartment  in
           relation to his apartment in the manner prescribed.”




      30.   The status of apartments together with its  undivided  interest
      in common areas and facilities, appurtenant to such apartment,  shall
      for all purposes  constitute  heritable  and  transferable  immovable
      property and each apartment owner shall be entitled to the  exclusive
      ownership and possession of his  apartment  in  accordance  with  the
      declaration.


      31.   Section 6 of the Act deals with “common areas  and  facilities”
      which reads as follows:
           “6.   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.
           Such percentage shall be computed by taking as a basis the value
           of the apartments in relation to the value of the property;  and
           such percentage shall  reflect  the  limited  common  areas  and
           facilities.


           (2)   The percentage of the undivided interest of each apartment
           owner in the common areas and facilities  as  expressed  in  the
           declaration shall have a permanent character and  shall  not  be
           altered without the consent of  all  the  apartment  owners  and
           expressed in an amended declaration duly executed and registered
           as provided in  this  Act.   The  percentage  of  the  undivided
           interest in  the  common  areas  and  facilities  shall  not  be
           separated from the apartment to which it appertains and shall be
           deemed to be conveyed or  encumbered  with  the  apartment  even
           though  such  interest  is  not  expressly  mentioned   in   the
           conveyance or other instrument.


           (3)   The common areas and facilities shall remain undivided and
           no apartment owner or any other person shall  bring  any  action
           for partition  or  division  of  any  part  thereof  unless  the
           property has been removed from the provisions  of  this  Act  as
           provided in Sections 14 and 22.  Any covenant  to  the  contrary
           shall be null and void.


           (4)         Each apartment owner may use the  common  areas  and
           facilities in accordance with the purpose  for  which  they  are
           intended without hindering or encroaching upon the lawful rights
           of the other apartment owners.


           (5)   The necessary work of maintenance, repair and  replacement
           of the common  areas  and  facilities  and  the  making  of  any
           addition  or  improvements  thereto  shall  be  carried  out  as
           provided herein and in the bye-laws.


           (6)    The  association  of  apartment  owners  shall  have  the
           irrevocable right, to be exercised by the Manager  or  Board  of
           Managers thereof, to have access to each apartment from time  to
           time during  reasonable  hours  as  may  be  necessary  for  the
           maintenance, repair and replacement of any of the  common  areas
           and facilities therein or accessible there from  or  for  making
           emergency repairs therein necessary to  prevent  damage  to  the
           common  areas  and  facilities  or  to  another   apartment   or
           apartments.”


      Declaration:
      32.   The Apartment Act casts an obligation on the colonizer to  file
      a statutory declaration.  Section 6 read with  Section  3(f)  of  the
      Apartment Act clearly indicates that clauses 1  to  8,  except  7  of
      Section 3(f) are to be provided by the  colonizer  to  the  apartment
      owners and each apartment owner is entitled to an undivided  interest
      in the common areas and facilities, in the  percentage  expressed  in
      the declaration.  The only exception is clause 7, which gives a right
      to the  colonizer  either  to  provide  or  not  to  provide  in  the
      declaration, the community and commercial facilities referred  to  in
      Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of  the  Development  Act.   There  is  a  marked
      difference between “common areas and facilities” and  “community  and
      commercial facilities”.  A colonizer is duty bound to provide all the
      common areas and facilities as per Section 3(f), except community and
      commercial facilities referred to in Section 3(f)(7).   “Common areas
      and facilities” referred to in Section 3(f)(7) of the  Apartment  Act
      has a co-relation with  the  “Community  and  Commercial  facilities”
      referred to in Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the Development  Act.    It  is
      for that reason that a discretion has been given to the colonizer  to
      either provide the same or not to provide the same in the declaration
      referred to in Section 3(f) of the  Apartment  Act.   The  expression
      “may” used in Section 3(f)(7) of the Apartment Act clearly  indicates
      that no duty is cast on the colonizer to give an  undivided  interest
      over those community and commercial  facilities  exclusively  to  the
      apartment owners of a particular colony, since the same  have  to  be
      enjoyed by other apartment owners of DLF City, Phase I, II and III as
      well.  Even otherwise, the colonizer could not have parted  with  his
      ownership rights exclusively to one Colony alone.


      33.   Section 11 of the Act  deals  with  “contents  of  declaration”
      which is extracted below:
           “11.  Contents  of  declaration  –  (1)  The  declaration  shall
           contain the following particulars, namely :-


           a) description of land on which the  building  and  improvements
              are to be  located  and  whether  the  land  is  freehold  or
              leasehold;


           b) description of the building stating the  number  of  storeyes
              and basement, the number  of  apartments  and  the  principal
              materials of which it is or is to be constructed;


           c) the apartment number of each apartment and statement  of  its
              location, approximate area, number  of  rooms  and  immediate
              common area to which  it  has  access   and  any  other  data
              necessary for its proper identification;


           d) description of the limited common area and facilities;


           e) description of the limited common  area  and  facilities,  if
              any, stating to which apartment their use is reserved;


           f)  value  of  the  property  and  of  each  apartment  and  the
              percentage of undivided interest  in  the  common  areas  and
              facilities appertaining to each apartment and its  owner  for
              all purposes, including  voting  and  a  statement  that  the
              apartment and such percentage of undivided interest  are  not
              encumbered in any manner whatsoever or not on the date of the
              declaration;


           g) statement of the purposes for which the building and each  of
              the apartments are intended and restricted as to use;


           h) the name of a person to receive service  of  process  in  the
              cases hereinafter provided, together with  the  residence  or
              place of business of such persons which shall be  within  the
              city, town or village in which the building is located;


           i) provisions as to the percentages of votes  by  the  apartment
              owners which shall be determinative of  whether  to  rebuild,
              repair, restore or sell the property in the event  of  damage
              or destruction of all or part of the property;


           j) any other details in connection with the property  which  the
              person executing the declaration may deem  desirable  to  set
              forth consistent with this Act; and


           k)  The  method   by  which  the  declaration  may  be   amended
              consistent with the provisions of this Act.


           (2)   A true copy of each of the declaration  and  bye-laws  and
           all amendments to the declaration or the bye-laws shall be filed
           in the office of the competent authority.”


      “Contents of deed of apartment” is dealt with in Section  12  of  the
      Act which reads as follows:
           “12.   Contents  of  deed  of  apartment.  –  (1)  The  deed  of
           apartment shall include the following particulars, namely :-


           a) a description of the land as provided in Section  11  or  the
              postal address of the property, including in either case  the
              number, page and date of executing the declaration, the  date
              and serial  number  of  its  registration  under  the  Indian
              Registration Act, 1908 and the date and other  reference,  if
              any, of its filing with the competent authority;


           b) the apartment number of the apartment in the declaration  and
              any other data necessary for its proper identification;


           c) statement of the use for which the apartment is intended  and
              restrictions on its use, if any;


           d) the percentage of  undivided  interest  appertaining  to  the
              apartment in the common areas and facilities; and


           e) any further details which  may  be  desirable  to  set  forth
              consistent with the declaration and this Act.


           (2)   A true copy of every deed of apartment shall be  filed  in
           the office of the competent authority.”


      34.   Section 13 of the Act  states  that  the  declaration  and  all
      amendments thereto and the deed  of  apartment  in  respect  of  each
      apartment and the floor plan of the  building  referred  to  in  sub-
      section (2) shall be registered under the Indian Registration Act.


      35.   If we scan through the  above  mentioned  provisions,  what  is
      discernible is that each apartment owner  shall  be  entitled  to  an
      undivided  interest  in  the  common  areas  and  facilities  in  the
      percentage expressed in the declaration and such percentage shall  be
      computed by taking as a basis the value of the apartment in  relation
      to the value of the property.  Common areas and facilities shall also
      remain undivided and the apartment owner or any other person can  use
      the common areas and facilities in accordance with  the  purpose  for
      which they are intended without  entering  or  encroaching  upon  the
      rights of other apartment owners.  Apartment owners are  entitled  to
      an undivided interest in the  common  areas  and  facilities  in  the
      percentage expressed  in  the  declaration,  within  the  meaning  of
      Section 3(f) (1) to (6) and (8) and it is also open to the  colonizer
      to provide, at its own cost, the community and commercial  facilities
      referred to in clause 7 of Section 3(f) read with Section 3(3)(f)(iv)
      of  the  Development  Act  by  including  them  in  the  declaration.
      Colonizer  cannot  also,  under  certain  circumstances,  confer  any
      undivided interest to an exclusive set of  apartment  owners  to  the
      detriment of similar apartment owners, who have apartments  in  other
      phases of a larger colony or city.   Apartment owners are, therefore,
      not entitled to  an  undivided  interest  or  possession  over  those
      community  and  commercial  facilities,  referred   to   in   Section
      3(3)(a)(iv) of the Development Act, unless specifically  provided  by
      the colonizer in the statutory declaration.


      Ownership Vs. User:


      36.   We have clearly indicated that the  ownership  right  over  the
      land earmarked for schools, hospitals, community  centers  and  other
      community  buildings  referred  to  in  Section  3(3)(a)(iv)  of  the
      Development Act vests  on  the  colonizer.   That  ownership  can  be
      divested,  as  already  indicated,  by  the   colonizer   through   a
      declaration under Sections 11 to 13 read with  Section  3(f)  of  the
      Apartment Act.  The colonizer has  to  provide  those  facilities  in
      discharge of its legal obligations under the Development Act and  the
      Act itself has recognized its or his legal ownership  over  the  area
      set apart for those facilities under Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the  Act.
      All the same, the right to enjoy  those  facilities  referred  to  in
      Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the Development  Act,  whether  shown  in  the
      declaration or not, under the Apartment Act, cannot be restricted  or
      curtailed and the apartment owners have no other  right,  except  the
      right of “user”.   Community centers, nursery  schools,  shops  etc.,
      therefore, being part of the approved layout plans by the  DTCP,  can
      be used by the apartment owners and, being part of the larger colony,
      are intended for independent use of all the apartment  owners  having
      direct exit to common areas, to the public street,  road,  etc.   All
      those facts would indicate, so far as apartment owners are concerned,
      they have only a right of user, so far  as  the  facilities  provided
      under Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the Development Act are concerned.


      37.   Learned counsel for respondents sought to argue that the Silver
      Oaks Apartments is a ‘gated’ colony and, therefore, the  developments
      which have taken place inside the boundary walls of that  colony  are
      to be treated as parts of internal development works and,  therefore,
      these are parts of common areas.  In  this  very  direction,  it  was
      further  submitted  that  these  are  the  necessary  and   essential
      facilities which have to be  provided  to  the  flat  owners  by  the
      developers, for the common use of  the  flat  owners.   Though,  this
      argument appears to be attractive, it has no merit  when  we  examine
      the  nature  of  structures  developed  by  the  developer  i.e.  the
      appellant to  which  it  is  claiming  its  exclusive  right.   These
      structures are two nursery schools, three  shops  and  one  community
      centre, which cannot be treated  as  “common  areas  and  facilities”
      within the definition of Section 3(f) of the Act.  As already pointed
      out above, they are parts of planning for larger  area,  which  plans
      were submitted by the appellant.  It is not meant for  the  exclusive
      use of the flat owners of Silver  Oaks  Apartments.   Position  would
      have been different had these been integral parts of the  facilities,
      in the sense that these facilities are essential for the enjoyment of
      the flats.


      38.   Common passages, staircases, lifts etc.  are  the  examples  of
      such common areas and facilities.  Likewise, stilt parking  area  may
      be treated as  part  of  common  areas  and  facilities,  in  certain
      circumstances.  Here these structures are the part of the larger area
      of about 130 acres in respect of which 7 licenses were  obtained  for
      development of the colony.  Silver Oaks Apartments,  which  comprises
      of 14.75 acres, is only a part thereof. The  nursery  schools,  shops
      and community centre are meant for  the  development  of  the  entire
      colony and are not confined only  to  these  apartments,  as  already
      noted in detail above.   Further,  as  per  our  detailed  discussion
      hereinabove, it is  clear  that  the  developer  is  given  right  to
      transfer  these  “community   buildings   and   community   centers”.
      Likewise,  even  schools  cannot  be  termed  as  part  of  “integral
      development” use whereof would be  confined  to  residents  of  these
      apartments.  Even the shops which are inside the boundary walls  have
      their opening from outside to enable the shopkeepers to cater to  the
      customers not only from these  apartments,  but  outsiders  as  well.
      Therefore, on these facts, we  are  not  impressed  by  the  argument
      predicated on “gated colony”.


      Cost not on Apartment owners:


      39.   We have found  that  the  Colonizer  is  legally  obliged  under
      Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the Act  to  construct  at  his  own  cost  the
      community  and  commercial  facilities  stipulated  therein   and   an
      agreement has to be entered into by the Colonizer with the DTCP  under
      the Development Act by which the Colonizer is prohibited by  law  from
      recovering the cost of providing those facilities from  the  apartment
      owners.   
The operative portion  of  the  agreement  executed  by  the
      colonizer reads as follows:
           “j)   That only convenient shopping sufficient  for  requirement
                 of the  Group  Housing  will  be  allowed  which  shall  be
                 approximate one shop per one thousand persons,  covering  a
                 maximum area of 200 sq. ft. per shop.


           k)     That  adequate  educational,  health,  recreational   and
                 cultural amenities to the norms and standards  provided  in
                 the respective  Development  plan  of  the  area  shall  be
                 provided.


                 The owner shall at his own cost construct the primary-cum-
                 nursery school, community building/dispensary and first aid
                 centre on the land set apart for this  purpose,  or  if  so
                 desired by the Govt. shall transfer to  the  Govt.  at  any
                 time free of cost land  thus  set  apart  for  primary  cum
                 nursery school, community building/dispensary and first aid
                 centre, in which case the Govt.  shall  be  at  liberty  to
                 transfer such land to any person or instruction including a
                 local authority on such terms and conditions as it may  lay
                 down.


           o)    That the owner  shall  abide  by  the  provisions  of  the
                 Haryana Apartment and Ownership Act, 1983.


           p)    That the responsibility of the  ownership  of  the  common
                 areas and  facilities  as  well  as  their  management  and
                 maintenance shall continue to vest with the colonizer  till
                 such time the responsibility is transferred to  the  owners
                 of the dwelling  units  under  the  Haryana  Apartment  and
                 Ownership Act, 1983.”


      40.   Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the Development Act read with the  above-
      mentioned clauses in the agreement would indicate  that  ownership  of
      the portion of the land set apart for the common areas and  facilities
      referred to therein vest with the Colonizer so also the obligation “at
      his own cost” to provide those facilities in the land  set  apart  for
      the said purpose.   
The Colonizer cannot recover cost of land  or  the
      amounts spent by him for providing those facilities from the apartment
      owners.  It is for the said reason that clause 7 of  Section  3(f)  of
      the Apartment Act has not made it  obligatory,  on  the  part  of  the
      Colonizer to include the “community and commercial” facilities in  the
      declaration.   If  the  colonizer  includes  the   same   within   the
      declaration, then Section  6  of  the  Apartment  Act  will  kick  in,
      consequently, the apartment owners would be entitled to the  undivided
      interest  in  respect  of  the  community  and  commercial  facilities
      provided therein without bearing the cost incurred by the colonizer in
      purchasing the land and the cost of construction.  In  our  view,  the
      colonizer  could  not  have  included  the  community  and  commercial
      facilities referred to in Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of the Development  Act,
      because the same is meant for the benefit of the  entire  colony,  not
      merely the flat/apartment owners in one part of the colony since  they
      form part of the lay out plans duly approved, which takes  in  plotted
      area and the group housing societies area as well.


      41.     We   have   also   gone   through   the   Apartment    Buyer’s
      agreement/conveyance deed.  The exact  extent  of  area  sold  by  the
      colonizer to an apartment owner is mentioned therein.   The  operative
      portion of the same reads as follows:
           “1.   That the Company hereby agrees to sell and  the  Apartment
           Allottee hereby agrees to acquire the said premises as  detailed
           below at the rate mentioned against it and upon  the  terms  and
           conditions set out hereunder as mutually agreed by  and  between
           the parties thereto.


           Particulars      Apartment    Super Area  Rate (s) per
           i.e. Bldg. No.   No.             (Appx)       sq meter


                121            82        98.28 sq. mtr.   Rs.6189/-


           3(a)  That the Apartment Allottee agress that the Super Area for
                 the purpose of calculating the sale price in respect of the
                 said premises shall be inclusive  of  the  area  under  the
                 periphery walls, area under columns and  walls  within  the
                 Apartment, half of the area of the walls common with  other
                 apartments  adjoining   the   said   apartment   and   also
                 proportionate share of the common area in the building i.e.
                 stairs, ramps, walk ways, lobbies, lift wells,  shafts  and
                 the like…….”


      42.   Considerable reliance was placed by the apartment owners on  the
      Judgment of  this  Court  in  Naharchand  Laloochand  Private  Limited
      (supra).  First of all, the Judgment is not at all  dealing  with  the
      community and commercial facilities in a group  housing  society  with
      reference to the provisions of Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of Development Act.
       The above-mentioned Judgment was delivered  in  the  context  of  the
      Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963 (MOFA)  and  the  Development
      Control Regulation (DCR) framed under the  Maharashtra  Regional  Town
      Planning Act, 1966.  In that case this Court was required  to  examine
      as to whether a stilt parking can be considered to be a  garage  under
      the definition of “flat” under MOFA.  As per the format provided under
      MOFA only a “flat” or “dwelling unit” or “shop”  or  “garage”  can  be
      sold by a developer.  Stilt parking could not be  separately  sold  in
      terms of the provisions  of  the  MOFA,  a  statutory  format  of  the
      agreement and the provisions of the DCR.  Such a  restriction  is  not
      there either under the 1975 Regulation Act or the  Apartment  Act  and
      there is no occasion to consider whether stilt  parking  can  be  sold
      along with the apartment.  In  any  view,  the  present  case  is  not
      concerned with the question of stilt parking.  We are  in  this  case,
      pointedly  concerned  with  the  facilities  provided  under   Section
      3(3)(a)(iv)  of  Development  Act,  consequently,  the  reasoning   of
      Naharchand Laloochand Private Limited (supra) are inapplicable to  the
      facts of this case, if examined in the light of the Regulation Act and
      the Apartment Act.


      Competent Authority:


      43.   We are also of the view that the High  Court  has  committed  an
      error in directing the DTCP to decide the objections of the  apartment
      owners with regard to the declaration  made  by  the  colonizer.   
The
      Competent Authority is defined under Section  3(i)  of  the  Apartment
      Act.  Section 11(2) provides for filing of declaration in  the  office
      of the  Competent  Authority.   
Section  24A  of  the  Act  prescribes
      penalties and prosecution  for  failure  to  file  a  declaration  and
      Section 24B permits the prosecution only  with  the  sanction  of  the
      Competent Authority.  
In a  given  case  if  the  developer  does  not
      provide  common  areas  or   facilities   like   corridors,   lobbies,
      staircases, lifts and fire escape etc.  the  Competent  Authority  can
      look into the objections of the apartment owners but when statute  has
      given a discretion to the colonizer to provide or not  to  provide  as
      per Section 3(f)(7) of the Apartment Act the facilities referred to in
      Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of Development Act, in our view no objection could
      be raised by the apartment owners and they cannot claim any  undivided
      interest over those facilities except  the  right  of  user.  
 In  the
      instant case the apartment owners have raised no grievance  that  they
      are being prevented from using the community and commercial facilities
      referred to in Section 3(3)(a)(iv) of Regulation Act, but they  cannot
      claim an undivided interest or right of management over them.


      44.   We may also refer to the  contention  raised  by  the  apartment
      owners  that  
the  Judgment  in  DLF  Qutab  Enclave  (supra)  is  not
      applicable in view of the Haryana Development and Regulation of  Urban
      Areas (Management) Act, 2003 which came into force on 03.04.2003.   
We
      have gone through the  amended  definition  of  “external  development
      works”.  
By virtue of the amendment, the scope of the said  expression
      has been widened and the State Government has given a wider discretion
      in expending the amount  collected  from  the  colonizer  as  external
      development charges.  
The Amendment Act does not seek to  transfer  an
      obligation of actually carrying out the external development work upon
      the colonizer.  
The Statement of Objects and Reasons of  the  Bill  of
      2003 which led to the amendment  indicates  that  though  the  various
      decisions of the High Court have gone in favour of the Department, the
      amendment  was  necessitated   to   make   certain   provisions   more
      comprehensive.  
In other words, the amendment has  no  effect  on  the
      Judgment of this Court in DLF Qutab Enclave (supra).


      45.   We are of  the  view  that  the  High  Court  has  not  properly
      appreciated  or  applied  the  various  statutory  provisions  of  the
      Regulation Act and the Rules framed thereunder, the terms of  licences
      issued, agreements executed between the colonizer and the DTCP  vis-à-
      vis the  various  provisions  of  the  Apartment  Act,  the  statutory
      declaration made by the colonizer and the Sale Deeds executed  between
      the parties.  
In such circumstances, we are inclined to set aside  the
      judgment of the High Court and dismiss the writ petition filed  before
      the High Court.  The appeal is,  therefore  allowed.   However,  there
      will be no order as  to  costs.   Applications  for  intervention  are
      allowed.








      Contempt Petition (Civil) No.      of 2013(D.No.29500/12)




      46.   The interim orders passed  by  this  Court  are  merged  in  the
      aforesaid judgment.   In such circumstances,  no  further  orders  are
      necessary in the  Contempt  Petition  and  the  same  is  disposed  of
      accordingly.





                                                            ……..……………………..J.
                                                (K.S. Radhakrishnan)






                                              ……………………………J.
                                               (A.K. Sikri)
      New Delhi,
      December 10, 2013.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.