I am looking for your guidance on a matter relating to my co-operative housing society on parking allotment.
My family had purchased an apartment in 2006-07 in our current society, this was a second sale. The initial owner of the apartment had a parking letter from the builder for the stilt parking which was not handed over to us.
In 2008, we purchased a vehicle and requested the society to allow us to park in the allocated parking which was attached to our flat. The MC wanted a letter from the initial owner which was not available with us.
While the other members are paying a nominal fees of Rs.120/- for the parking , we are paying an amount Rs.450/- Ever since we are trying to resolve the issue with the MC but there is no clarity or decision that is taken in this matter.
For the last 2 years , my parking spot was vacant since i had sold the car, yet the committee has charged me the fees of Rs.450/- towards parking.
Just last week i have bought a new car and have resume parking in the same parking space. The MC is now refusing to let me park in the said space until such time that there is a clarity on this matter.
Request your guidance on the same.
I C Naik
It is unfortunate that you have to deal with a managing committee who is trying to be difficult in the matter of trivial issues or I would say NO ISSUE at all. The managing committee appears to be full of irrational thinkers. On one hand by collecting parking charges for a slot the ownership of which is disputed by them, they have conceded that you are the rightful owner.
This is a case of unfair practice and deficiency in services which is being looked in to by District Consumer Court against a Complaint filed by an aggrieved consumer. The Act is called the Consumer Protection Act and its implications are held by Supreme Court to be of very wide scope including awarding damages towards mental stress and compensation for loss of an opportunity to shre the resources of the Society to which you have a rightful claim.
You can also ask the Society as to what documentary evidence was resorted to for allowing the previous own to use that Parking Slot as without evidence they would not have permitted its use.