Skip to main content

Kerala High Court bolsters flat owners’ registration rights

A simple directive issued by the Kerala high court has brought into effect the right of owners to register their apartments individually, thereby tremendously enhancing sale ability of apartments.

The directive, issued by Justice A Muhamed Mustaque on a petition by J K Pearl Apartment Owners Association at Pulleppady, also enables setting up a basic framework of rules regarding right of apartment owners on common facilities and maintenance.

In a petition filed through advocate P B Sahasranaman, the association secretary P Krishna Das questioned the registration department's denial of registration of apartments individually as per Kerala Apartment Ownership Act of 1983.

The Act provides for ownership of individual apartment in a building and make such apartment heritable and transferable property. The practice now is to register apartments under the Registration Act, which often leads to a situation where the exact rights of an individual apartment owner are not clearly specified. 

Additionally, the Act facilitates registration of a declaration of the apartment, which describes the common areas and facilities, value of the property and each apartment, percentage of rights of each apartment owner on common facilities and purposes, including voting; restrictions of use, votes required to rebuild, repair, restore, or sell the property; and any other aspect regarding ownership of the apartment. 

The Act provides that in all registration offices, a book called 'Register of Declarations and Deeds of Apartments' should be maintained, along with an index. Through an affidavit, the inspector general of registration claimed that no such register has been provided to the registrar and that government hasn't provided any guidelines on it. 

Declining to agree, Justice Mustaque held, "Every association has a right to register the association in accordance with the Act. The rights of apartment owners forming association and carry out the objectives in terms of the Act cannot be defeated for the reason that the government failed to provide any register." 

The court ordered the government to provide register to all sub-registrars for registering as per the Act within three months. Further, the court directed inspector general of registration to order sub registrars to allow registration as per the Act and record it in the Book One kept as per Registration Act until the government provides registers.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kochi/High-Court-bolsters-flat-owners-registration-rights/articleshow/45600935.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

When debt is bona fide disputed and the defence is a substantial one, the court will not wind up the company

In SHITAL FIBERS LTD.  vs  INDIAN ACRYLICS LIMITED, as per the respondent, appellant had made a payment of Rs.61,83,218/­. However, there was an outstanding balance of Rs.8,92,723/­ as on 28.7.2008. Since despite repeated requests, balance amount was not paid, the respondent issued a statutory notice to the appellant. The same was duly responded to. As the payment was not made despite notice being duly served on the appellant, the respondent filed the aforesaid Company Petition seeking winding up of the present appellant for its inability to pay admitted debts. The learned Company Judge vide order dated 28.9.2015 admitted the Company Petition. However, while doing so, the learned Company Judge observed, that since the appellant was an on­going concern, an opportunity should be granted to it to settle the accounts with the respondent by 31.12.2015. Only in case of failure of the settlement, the citation was directed to be published. On appeal, the Division Bench of the High Cou...
Post a Comment
Read more

Abusing in-laws a ground for divorce: SC

Abusing in-laws and not allowing them to reside in the matrimonial home by a woman amounts to cruelty to her spouse, ground enough for grant of divorce, the Supreme Court has ruled while allowing an NRI's plea for legal separation from his wife. A bench of Justices Vikaramajit Sen and A M Sapre said such incidents could not be termed as "wear and tear" of family life as held by Madras High Court which had said that a couple must be prepared to face such situations in matrimonial relationship. The NRI had filed a divorce petition alleging that his wife was abusive to his family members and did not allow his parents and siblings to stay in his house when they visited the US. Referring to an incident, the husband told the court that his wife had once locked him and his sister out of the house and abused them saying they belonged to a 'prostitute family'. She refused to allow her sister-in-law to enter the house and even lodged a police complaint against her hu...
4 comments
Read more