1. Model Comparison:

   • Model 1: Overall Undivided Share Transferred:

     • Builder receives full ownership of the undivided share of land.
     • 72 flats go to existing owners, and the remaining flats belong to the builder.
     • 
       Pros:

       • Simpler agreement and fewer land ownership complexities.
       • Builder has full flexibility for future projects.
       • Suitable for societies not keen on land division complexities.

     • 
       Cons:

       • Loss of direct control over land by the owners.
       • Owners may face higher tax liabilities on the undivided share transfer.

   • Model 2: Land Division (60% Owners, 40% Builder):

     • Owners retain 60% of the undivided share, while the builder holds 40%.
     • Ownership of flats aligns proportionally with land ownership.
     • 
       Pros:

       • Owners retain partial land control.
       • May reduce long-term capital gains tax exposure for owners.
       • Transparent distribution of land ownership.

     • 
       Cons:

       • Complex legal and registration process.
       • Builder may demand additional considerations for reduced land share.

2. Tax Implications:

   • 
     Model 1: Owners may face higher capital gains tax as the entire land is transferred to the builder.
   • 
     Model 2: Lower capital gains tax since owners retain a portion of the land, deferring taxation until future transactions.

3. Recommendation:

   • 
     Model 2 is generally better if owners want partial control of the land and lower tax liability.
   • Opt for Model 1 if the builder is offering significantly better terms or higher-quality redevelopment in return for full land control.

4. Next Steps:

   • Consult a property tax advisor to calculate potential tax liabilities for each model.
   • Ensure a clear redevelopment agreement that protects owners' rights, timelines, and quality assurance.

For detailed, personalized advice, consider a phone consultancy.
Hope you find the information helpful. You are free to contact me for further discussion. If you could spare two minutes to write a review, it would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.
Shubham Goyal

Apartment owners must form an association and designate a board of managers. The board is responsible for managing the association's assets and common areas. 

Before vacating the premises, ensure that each member has an individual agreement with the developer

Include a timeline for possession handover and penalties for delays. 

Allow the society to terminate the agreement if the developer doesn't perform.

Clearly outline amenities and allocate parking spaces. 

Development agreement should be entered into by society with builder 

2) agreement should be stamped and registered .

3) irrevocable consent of each flat owner should be obtained by society 

Collaboration is better one. Since you are not making any development and only land is made available to builder hence JD is not good. 

Both the options are good in its own standing and hence you can choose either of these two.

Dear Client 

In the Present Scenario, your housing association is going for redevelopment and you wish to enquire on which would be a better model for redevelopment. Further, your society consists of 36 flats presently, and for the redevelopment project, you have identified a builder as well, who says that, he would build 120 flats in total, out of which, 72 flats would be that of the owner. With respect to the first model, the entire UDS would be transferred to the builder, wherein most of the flats would be transferred to the builder, and the owners would list their holding in the land, affecting their capital gains and developing the property further. Furthermore, with the first model, you may have to pay long term capital gains tax, but on the other hand, you may benefit due to higher holding of flat ownership. With respect to the second model, the UDS would be divided with 60% being in favour of owners and rest 40% being allocated to the builder. Herein, the owners may retain a significant share of land, that would ensure benefit from long term appreciation of land value. However, looking into he details of both the models, the second model may be preferred as the same suggests long term gains, including advantage from land value appreciation, and less tax liabilities. 

Hope you find this answer beneficial for resolving the dispute 

- Both options  nearly same from a taxation prospective for owners , however the Model 1 is more beneficial for the owners. 

You don’t do that in such a manner first a feasibility report is called for and on basis of that the entire FSI  and other factors are taken into account thereafter a plan is made

1. The registered deed will protect your interests especially in the event of breach of contract you may be able to enforce the same through court. 

2. You may not be able to enforce the contract conditions legally based on unregistered deed though you may be able to use this document as an evidence. 

Always advisable to register JDA 

SC has held registration of development agreement is mandatory 

if it is not registered it would not be enforceable 

JDA should always be registered for strict compliance of the terms and conditions of the same.

In Tamil Nadu, the registration of a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) has been made mandatory by the state government. This move aims to bring clarity to landowners and developers by categorizing liabilities and setting time limits for construction projects. The state registration department has introduced laws to facilitate this process, eliminating the need for a power of attorney in such agreements.

Risks of Not Registering the JDA:

1. Legal Enforceability Issues: An unregistered JDA may face challenges in court regarding its enforceability. In the event of disputes, courts may not entertain unregistered agreements, making it difficult to enforce the terms outlined in the JDA.

2. Admissibility Concerns: During legal proceedings, the admissibility of an unregistered JDA can be contested, potentially weakening your position in disputes.

3. Tax Implications: Unregistered JDAs can lead to unfavorable tax consequences, as certain tax benefits and considerations are contingent upon proper registration.

4. Regulatory Non-Compliance: Non-registration may result in non-compliance with state regulations, leading to potential legal penalties or complications in obtaining necessary approvals.

Recommendation:

Given the legal and practical implications, it is advisable to register the JDA to ensure its enforceability and to safeguard the interests of all parties involved. Consulting with a legal professional experienced in property law in Tamil Nadu is recommended to navigate the registration process and to address any specific concerns related to your redevelopment project.

For detailed, personalized advice, consider a phone consultancy. I hope you find this information helpful. You are free to contact me for further discussion. If you could spare two minutes to write a review, it would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Shubham Goyal

As the transfer of share/allocation of share conveys right, title and entitlement in favour of the developer, the Development Agreement is mandatorily required to be registered, as it amounts to conveyance. This is covered under Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act and Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. The registration of a Development Agreement is essential for the protection of the rights of the plot-owners and developers

No doubt it may not be mandatory but you were advised to get it registered for protecting your interests especially when there arises a litigation in future or to enforce the conditions in case of breach of contract conditions by either side.

You may have to take a considered decision accordingly.

In Tamil Nadu, the registration of Joint Development Agreements (JDAs) is mandatory. This requirement stems from the state's amendments to the Indian Stamp Act and the Registration Act, 1908, which mandate the registration of documents that create or assign rights in immovable property. Specifically, Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, requires the registration of non-testamentary instruments that purport to create, declare, assign, limit, or extinguish any right, title, or interest in immovable property.

A JDA typically assigns development rights from the landowner to the developer, thereby necessitating its registration to ensure legal enforceability. The Tamil Nadu government has emphasized this by mandating the registration of Joint Venture agreements and reducing the associated stamp duty and registration fees to encourage compliance.

Failure to register a JDA can lead to significant legal complications:

• Legal Enforceability Issues: An unregistered JDA may not be legally enforceable, making it challenging to uphold its terms in a court of law.

• Admissibility Concerns: In legal disputes, an unregistered JDA may not be admissible as evidence, weakening any claims based on the agreement.

• Tax Implications: Unregistered agreements can result in unfavorable tax consequences, as certain tax benefits are contingent upon proper registration.

• Regulatory Non-Compliance: Non-registration may lead to non-compliance with state regulations, potentially resulting in legal penalties.

Therefore, it is advisable to register the JDA to ensure its legal validity and enforceability. Consulting with a legal professional experienced in property law in Tamil Nadu is recommended to navigate the registration process and address any specific concerns related to your redevelopment project.

- In case the JDA is not registered, it shall not be considered as transfer.

Yes  it shall be registered