Supreme Court Limits Open Space Deficiency Premium to 10%
Real Estate

Supreme Court Limits Open Space Deficiency Premium to 10%

The Supreme Court upholds a Bombay High Court ruling, directing BMC to charge only a 10% premium for open space deficiency The Supreme Court has reaffirmed a 2017 decision by the Bombay High Court regarding the premium charged for open space deficiency. The court stated that the premium can only be 10% and not the previously charged 100%. This directive was given to the BMC (Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation), instructing them to deduct the premium at the stipulated 10% rate and refund the excess amount with interest within six weeks to Wadhwa Estate and Developer (I) Pvt. Ltd. The case originated in 2011 when the developer submitted a proposal for the redevelopment of a MHADA building and sought leniency for open space deficiency. The BMC, in response, issued a demand notice charging a premium at a rate of 100%, which amounted to roughly Rs 5 crore. The developer argued that since the redevelopment was under Regulation 33(10) for Economically Weaker Sections, Low Income Group, and Middle-Income Group tenements, the BMC should only charge 10% of the premium. The BMC's refusal led the developer to approach the Bombay High Court.

The Supreme Court upholds a Bombay High Court ruling, directing BMC to charge only a 10% premium for open space deficiency The Supreme Court has reaffirmed a 2017 decision by the Bombay High Court regarding the premium charged for open space deficiency. The court stated that the premium can only be 10% and not the previously charged 100%. This directive was given to the BMC (Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation), instructing them to deduct the premium at the stipulated 10% rate and refund the excess amount with interest within six weeks to Wadhwa Estate and Developer (I) Pvt. Ltd. The case originated in 2011 when the developer submitted a proposal for the redevelopment of a MHADA building and sought leniency for open space deficiency. The BMC, in response, issued a demand notice charging a premium at a rate of 100%, which amounted to roughly Rs 5 crore. The developer argued that since the redevelopment was under Regulation 33(10) for Economically Weaker Sections, Low Income Group, and Middle-Income Group tenements, the BMC should only charge 10% of the premium. The BMC's refusal led the developer to approach the Bombay High Court.

Related Stories

Gold Stories

Hi There!

Now get regular updates from CW Magazine on WhatsApp!

Click on link below, message us with a simple hi, and SAVE our number

You will have subscribed to our Construction News on Whatsapp! Enjoy

+91 81086 03000

Join us Telegram