Nod for realtor’s plan to to construct two more towers set aside
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court quashed a single judge’s order imposing a fine on the flat owners association and allowing Hiranandani Developers Private Ltd (HDPL) to construct two new housing towers against the original plan without the consent of flat owners.
The findings of the single-judge are not completely in tune with the provisions or the purposes of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), wrote the first bench comprising Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy while allowing an appeal filed by the flat owners association. The bench also quashed the approval granted by the DTCP for the revision of the building plan.
On July 8 last year, Justice RMT Teekaa Raman imposed a fine of Rs 1,19,500 on the flat owners association for suppressing material documents to stay the construction works. He added that the impugned approval given by the Housing and Urban Development Department secretary and DTCP is not violative of any legal right of the flat owners.
Aggrieved by this, the association moved an appeal contending that HDPL initially obtained plan approval from the DTCP for the development of 14 towers in two phases along with a school, and two clubhouses, one for each phase, on 128 acres. The construction of seven towers for phase one was executed simultaneously and the individual flats were handed to the buyers in 2014. Phase two construction commenced in 2014, but unlike phase one, the construction of all towers was not taken up simultaneously.
Though phase two is almost complete, steps were not taken for the construction of the clubhouse, they said. Meanwhile, HDPL started building two new towers namely in the location where the clubhouse was proposed without the consent of the flat owners, it said, adding that the Housing department approved the revised plan in violation of laws.
The bench said the association had not suppressed any material facts and wrote that it was the promoter who changed the plan considering market conditions, for financial gain. With the observations, the bench set aside the single-judge order. The bench also directed the HDPL to approach the owners of the flats for their consent to alter the clubhouse into housing towers, if two-thirds of the occupants of each of the buildings gave their consent.