Ask builder to execute written MOU that your UDS would not be decreased in event of increase in flats
2) in the event it is decreased he will compensate existing flat owners with x amount
3) UDS will decrease if flats increase
Disproportionate UDS between existing owners and future new owners in a redevelopment project
My Apartment complex is going to demolished due to structural defect which is 8 years old now. The builder agreed to redevelop the project since he has some unsold inventories of 140 flats which our housing association put an injection on it. Since the FSI has increased, builder would like to utilize it to minimize his loss trough redevelopment. The additional buildup area achieved due to FSI benefit, he is asking 60% of the buildup area achieved due to increased FSI to builder & only 40% will be shared to owners. Builder is giving assurance that he will not touch the UDS of the existing owners. If we agree to it now. Since the land area remains the same, he is increasing the no.of flats, so the UDS will not be UDS for new buyers. They will get less % share as compared to existing owners. Is this allowed legally. what are all the possible legal issues in future. what law says to this scenario?
Asked 3 months ago in Constitutional Law
First answer received in 10 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
8 Answers
Is this Legally allowed, if i would like to counter the builder to go for reconstruction as is condition to avoid that illegality clause. Since there was no written clause in regulations to allocate proportionate UDS under RERA or in CMDA regulations.
Asked 3 months ago
oppose redevelopment as on reconstruction your UDS would further come down
My primary Doubt is , is this really legal to allocate disproportionate UDS share to new buyers. He made sure that the existing flat owner's UDS will not touched in Court itself. The new buyers will be intimated about this disproportionate share during sales. Probably the Association can undergo a MoU as prescribed by you. my doubt is in the legal side of this approach.
Asked 3 months ago
Under RERA the builder is obliged to execute a registered conveyance deed of the flat with uds to the association or allotees. Uds is common area for utilization of allotees. By definition a “common area/uds” is equally divided among all. It is not possible to allot different uds to allotees original owners or new owners. There is nothing like assurance by builder that he will not touch uds of owners. Even an agreement allotting different uds is not legal and if executed no enforceable.
The purchasers would sue the builder if they are not allocated any UDS and all is given to existing flat owners . it is discrimination against the new purchasers
The builders assurances to not to reduce the existing UDS on redevelopment is to eb reduced to writing in the form of an agreement or MOU and may be registered wherever necessary in order to enforce the same in court of la w in case of dispute on this subject at a later stage.
The new buyers have to be contended with the allotted UDS only because it is a redeveloped property hence the new buyer will go for purchase only after accepting the terms. There is no illegality in it.
You are aware that there is no clause in this regard either by RERA or CMDA hence it can be considered as circumstantial.
This redevelopment agreement will commence only if all the members are agreeing to the terms and conditions made in the agreement, anyone finding the agreement conditions are unjustified or causing any loss to him, they can very well oppose it and approach court with a suit for injunction against the builder or society also.
There is no illegality about it especially if the buyers are made aware of the terms with regard to the UDS made available to them which may not be equal to the existing owners.
The buyers will come forward to purchase only if they agree to the conditions. .
Dear Client,
The builder's proposal to allocate 60% of the additional built-up area from increased FSI to himself and only 40% to the existing owners raises several legal concerns, particularly regarding the Uniformity of Distributive Share and the rights of the existing owners versus new buyers. Legally, UDS refers to the proportionate share of the land that each flat owner holds, which is calculated based on the area of their individual flats relative to the total land area. Since the FSI increase allows for more construction, the distribution of this additional space typically should be proportional to the existing UDS shares to ensure fairness. However, there is no specific regulation under RERA or CMDA that explicitly governs the allocation of additional FSI benefits in terms of UDS. The lack of clear regulation means that agreements are often subject to negotiation between the builder and the housing association.
The builder’s assurance that the UDS of existing owners will remain unchanged while offering a disproportionate share of the additional built-up area to himself could potentially be valid if documented properly in an agreement. However, this approach may create disparities for new buyers, who will receive a smaller proportion of UDS compared to existing owners. If new buyers are informed about their reduced UDS share and agree to it, there may be limited grounds for legal challenge. However, if the allocation appears unfair or discriminatory, it might invite disputes or legal challenges from future buyers. To address these concerns, consider negotiating a fair distribution of the additional FSI benefits and documenting the agreement in a legally binding MOU.
