Each Flat Owner Entitled to One Parking Space
Img : 99acres

Usually, each flat owner is eligible for one parking space in housing societies and this parking can either be stilt or open parking as per owner’s choice space and according to the availability of space in the society. Thus, the Bombay High Court ruled that a flat owner can get an extra parking space in the society if other owners decline their parking space means if other society members don’t wish to have parking space.

Justice Dhanuka said that the allotment of declined parking space will now be carried out on a year-to-year basis for the flat owners who wish to have additional parking space.

The High Court gave this ruling while hearing a petition filed by a Bandra housing society that challenges a cooperative court directive to create additional parking space for a new flat owner. Justice Dhanuka also turned down the interim order and asked the society to take a final decision regarding if the new flat owner was entitled to parking space in the society premises during a year.

Justice Dhanuka stated that as per bylaw, every flat owner having a motor vehicle is eligible to have one dedicated parking space but is not entitled to an additional parking space at the same time.

A petition was filed against Royal Manor housing society in Bandra which was constructed in 2004. The society has 20 members, 19 stilt and five open parking spaces. The builder allotted single parking spaces to 19 flat members, and five out of them got additional space to park their vehicles. The society rejected the request of making parking available to a flat owner who purchased a residential unit in the same premises in the year 2012. The society said that the previous owner of that flat didn’t had allotted parking space. In 2015, in an interim order, the cooperative court ordered the society to create an additional parking space for the new member.

Hence, the society challenged interior order saying that they don’t have additional space to create a parking lot. The high court also agreed to the same and said that the interim order could not be passed.