Heritage City residents say right over common area sub judice, space sold against existing norms
The DTP and enforcement department on Thursday demolished five porta cabin shops inside the high-end condominium built by the Unitech Limited two decades ago. The shops sold essential items and were maintained by the residents’ welfare associationUpdated: Nov 30, 2017 23:21 IST
The demolition of shops at Heritage City has highlighted the dispute between builders and residents in housing societies over common areas.
Residents of Heritage City claimed that shops were demolished on the directions of a private person who was sold a part of the common area inside the complex by the builder, when the matter is sub judice.
In 1998, the Heritage City residents’ welfare association (RWA) had moved a petition in the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC) claiming right over common areas of the condominium. MRTCP later became Competition Appellate Tribunal (Compat).
Heritage City RWA secretary Rajdeep Sherawat said, “In 2016, Compat said common areas belong to residents. Copmat, however, did not say common areas belong exclusively to residents. We moved a petition in the Supreme Court and the matter is pending. Meanwhile, the builder sold some space in the common area to a private person who is not a resident. That person filed a case against the RWA seeking removal of these shops that we manage to meet our daily need for essential items.”
The residents had exchanged heated arguments with the officials of district town planning (DTP) enforcement over legality of the demolition.
Shephalika Sharma, a resident, said, “The developer left this society in 2000. Since then, the RWA has been maintaining it. As per the Haryana Apartments Owners Act, common area belongs to residents who can use it for common purpose.”
Arun Kumar Gupta, principal secretary, town and country planning (TCP), Haryana, said, “I have heard complaint of unauthorised shops at Heritage City. The shops were not authorised. If anybody has an objection, he she can challenge it.”
The representative of the developer did not respond to repeated calls and text messages for comment.
In the fight between developers and residents over common areas, builders got a leg-up in 2013, when residents of Silver Oaks Society lost their right over common area against DLF in the Supreme Court.
“However, In October 2015, the Bombay high court in an interim order restrained a city builder from selling the common areas of a newly constructed high rise building,” Shephalika said.