Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > The Indian Car Scene


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 2nd May 2011, 14:03   #76
BHPian
 
AutoNoob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NCR
Posts: 208
Thanked: 207 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by vina View Post
before you post another SC judgement, what is your point? I know about this one because my colleague Sobha Developers to court over this.
The point I wanted to make further is that since builders can no more sale the 'reserved parking'. Rather as per the judgment there is nothing like a 'reserved parking', its just a 'common area' which anyone may use to park his/her vehicle.

If one family in society goes on to buy cars on 'per member' basis they may not even think twice before parking their cars in 'others' parking area, and thereby creating more chaos, and altercations will definitely be everyday routine.

So, even the previous 'security' of having your 'own parking' is not available, whether you have only one car or multiple, unless you can take your car into elevator and park inside your flat, as shown in Hyundai i10 Uber Cool adv .

As for your friend who took the builder to court may realize later that she could get the money back/ or avoided paying, but she (including other residents of society) may not have a parking space, which can be called 'reserved parking'.

Therefore this judgment may result as Catch-22, till common sense prevails. 'One should not pay for parking space, but on certain days may end up without a place to park, as the neighbour came home early than him'.

The only way is to pray to God that the builder has provided atleast 1 parking space for each flat and every family in that society has atmost 1 car. Oh God !!!

Cheers !!!

Last edited by AutoNoob : 2nd May 2011 at 14:04.
AutoNoob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2011, 14:41   #77
Senior - BHPian
 
k_ajay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,164
Thanked: 464 Times
Post Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rajushank84 View Post

Long rant.

Thoughts?

We could say, only people who have parking spaces in their homes should buy cars. But that logic has a huge flaw. No one will buy a car to keep it parked at home.
Calling the logic a huge flaw is alright, but what is the justification for parking on the road? Isn't it an inconvenience caused for the other road users? What about the dents/scratches one can't control when parked outside the house, at times when we cannot watch?

I live in Bangalore. You can see in the by-lanes of IndiraNagar, where some people can afford BMWs, but park it on the streets, which are already way to narrow for a 2 lane road. Yes, to protect our interest can we blame the govt. for constructing narrow roads, but aren't we compounding on the problem? Apart from blaming the govt, some amount of blame need to be shared by the very people that built the house. Why wasn't proper planning done to park a car inside the premise?

Of course, the 'so-then-what-do-we-do' issue can be into a continuous debate. Getting a solution out for this can be tough [and the govt is also to blame]

Quote:
Originally Posted by rajushank84 View Post
I was trying to search and find out about whether or not it is legal to park a car in a residential area. Every house owner puts a "NO PARKING" sign in front of their gate, and even if they don't, they come for a fight saying "Dont park in front of my house.". Whether it is legal or not is secondary in India, actually. What will they do to the car if you still park there? That is the question.
It isn't wrong to put a 'No Parking' sign on a gate, given someone cannot stand at the gate asking everyone not to park. And it's the most basic of common sense and this one needs no arguement. The gate is for entry/exit of people and vehicles. So, we shouldn't park in front of someone's gate. Simple. There cannot be any arguement on whether it is right or wrong, whether it is legal or not.

And reg your question, the most common threat i've heard people say is that the tyres will be deflated/punctured.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rajushank84 View Post
So the question naturally comes up, from a car owner's perspective: "Where ARE we supposed to park, when going into the city anyway?"
The retort also comes up from a non-car-owner: "Why should that be everyone's problem? Its your car. Who asked you to commute in your own car?"
This is correct, from car owners' perspective. And it's a question for the govt. Parking on the roads, if you'd agree, is a huge inconvenience to road users [car, 2 wheelers, mini lorries, etc]. It's also a risk for the owner parking, what with the amount of scratches, knicks that the car picks up, when left unattended.

The answer lies in parking buildings and spaces that the govt. should build. In Blore, I regularly use the parking spaces available in residency road [in the junction of residency road & brigade road], the parking building in Jayanagar 4th block, the parking space near commercial street, etc. It's safer to park at these places, than on roads. It's legal and paid parking. And it's convenient and someone going to shop, can be a bit more relaxed and concentrate on the task at hand.

Just this Saturday, I was pissed and had a fight with the security of Raheja complex in Blore, which is near Forum mall. The bloody builder has built a shopping complex without parking for visitors [except for a restaurant], and expects footfalls. I'd like to call him an a**h*** just for his attitude. Also, I wonder how the govt. approved this commercial building project, knowing visitors won't have parking. The security openly asked me to park on a service road by the side. I gave him a piece of my mind without losing my cool [worthless effort, I agree], dropped my wife off and took the car to the small road behind the complex, found a shady deserted spot and was resting with the car there. I've told my wife clearly and have woved never to return to that complex ever.


If you ask me, the govt. is entirely at blame, for not building car parking complexes, in every major street, that is a commercial shopping area. Not the fault of car owners or residents [we are both right], but the Govt.

Ditto with residential projects. Govt. should not allow projects that do not have car park allotment inside the premise [be it flat or independent house] and deny approvals.


Btw, a very good post. Most people avoid it by arguing their side of the righteous claim. But we need to tackle this question head-on.

The other thing I've noticed and like to put down here, is that I've learnt that there is nothing called the Educated class and the uneducated class. I've seen 4 wheeler owners of reputed cars as well as the not so pricey, violate the law as per their needs. When it finally comes down to ones' priorities, they do as they'd like, that satisfied their immediate requirement/situation. Education be damned.
k_ajay is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2011, 15:55   #78
aby
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 97
Thanked: 6 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by adisag View Post
While I followed you (and tend to agree) till your calculation of 3 Lakh Per Slot (Capex excluding Land), I would like to elaborate and understand the maths that leads you to say 500 Rs/day.

My understanding and assumptions are as follows:
Treat an MLCP as Social Infrastructure (while we are not looking at the government subsidizing parking, we are'nt expecting them to earn an unreal profit either) - thus we can safely assume a life (and payback period) of 15 years
An EMI for a 3 lakh rs loan @ 12% interest for 15 years works out to be 3600 Rs/Month
Lets add 10% for maintenance and overheads (in reality it will be around 3-4%) - This works out to 3600+360 = 3960 Rs/Month or 130 Rs/day
Now, I would expect the government to recover this in two parts - one a parking fee of approximately 1500-2000 Rs/Month (steep but not unreal)
So far so good, but the basic flaw is still not addressed. What about the land to build the structure.
While I agree that Parking is social infrastructure and you should not expect profits from it, at the end of the day it still costs money to build.

Areas where maximum congestion occurs are invariable prime areas. I am not even taking absolute CBD areas like MG road in Bangalore, where land costs can be as high as Rs. 40,000 a sq. Ft. Even in commercial areas like Jayanagar and Indiranagar - the price of land exceeds Rs. 20,000 a sq. feet. Take a basic FSI of 4 (Which in Bangalore is given only to lands adjoining 100 feet roads) you need to add Rs. 4000-5000 per square foot to parking space as land costs. Which means cost per parking slot is about 15-18 Lakh. Now if you do the same calculation which you put up. You are looking at a cost of about 18000-21000 a month for parking.

Now remember I am not considering the cost of manpower (For collecting fee), cost of maintenance of the MLCP (Electricity, repairs) etc.

Quote:
and the balance as a congestion tax levied on all cars using the roads and therefore parking infrastructure of a given area.

This would effectively mean
1) EMI's go up by ~ 2500 Rs/month due to an annualized congestion tax being charged
2) Users pay hefty rates for parking in specially developed MLCP's
3) Any surfeit is not adjusted with other budget heads, but is used to improve parking infrastructure in non chargeable areas (visitor parking within residential colonies for example)

Hope this makes sense..

Cheers
Again if you bring the land cost in prime areas, this calculation doesn't hold good.
aby is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2011, 16:14   #79
Senior - BHPian
 
k_ajay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,164
Thanked: 464 Times
Post Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dot View Post
The growth has been good, very good. I am sure most BHPians will agree that they have been unquestionable beneficiaries of this growth. It is just that the authorities were sleeping. I hope going forward things change for the better.
That's right, Dot. It is this very growth that has helped us buy car, better cars, 4 cars, etc. And yes, as much as we blame ourselves for buying more, not willing to pay the right costs, etc, the govt. has a huge role in managing the growth and providing for facilities. More needs to be done from the taxes and charges collected; they are indeed relaxed and not proactive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by phamilyman View Post
I dont know in your case, but in most cases, people don't plan for parking any cars in the house - everyone assumes that God/government will freely provide parking when rates in South Delhi are at 30k-50k/sqft

The core issue is that our sense of entitlement far outstrips our willingness to pay the true costs.
Couldn't have been better put, Phamilyman. Someone else in the form echoed the same statement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by roy_libran View Post
Dogma or not, it is high time we started considering some rules, around when a car can be owned and when not. This should become the basis for eligibility to get into a car purchase decision:

1. The person needs to show that he has sufficient parking space, within the bounds of his own property / rented property. Parking space on public land is not acceptable. In case of Shared parking spaces, a similar rule, would apply for the entire address. - Agree in totality. This is how it should be. Period!

2. The person needs to demonstrate reasonable justification for more than one car in a family of four. For example, two people working in two different places, without reasonable recourse to public transportation, can be a reasonable ground. Agree partly, as this can be debatable. A person having clearly marked private space for parking as many cars as he has, can ask anyone else to take a walk, when it comes to arguement.

A reasonable work around for this is to bring in a new tax scheme for additional cars and increase the tax as the owner increases his count of cars. For ex: I live behind the HAL old airport, and there are no auto service here. There are only 2 buses that ply every day. I have 1 car that I take to work on weekdays and in case of any emergency, my family will have a problem of not having transport. One of the solution I have is to get a small 2nd car and a call driver, when required. Because I have a need to own 2 cars [one for emergency], I am willing to pay a luxury tax on owning a 2nd car. Like Vina had said, I'd have to bare the real cost of owning another vehicle.

3. The person needs to justify why he cannot use a two wheeler, instead of a four wheeler. This is hugely debatable and personally, I wouldn't agree. The reason being, we vehicle owners, whether you'd want to agree or not, are not always disciplined and follow the rules/norm. A lot of vehicle owners driver rashly and when it comes to 2 wheels, the safety of the person driving can come into question. This is one of the reason why I personally have avoided getting a 2 wheeler for my wife/mother. I care more for their life than allowing them to be bull dozed by some driver whose either drunk or was too careless in his driving methodology/approach. I anticipate a lot of members to disagree with you on this.

In addition, some of these might be helpful:
1. There should be an incremental registration charge after the first car, for each car that a family acquires. I know this is a bit complex to implement, but some rules are concievable. The second registration should cost at least 50% more than the first, the third should be around four times, and so on... The idea is to penalize people for taking up more road space, and causing environmental impact, for the sake of luxury. Totally Agree. The rates should be propotional to the no. of cars owned and fair. And it should not be implemented to penalize people, but pay for the additional consumption they're making on the roads and more pollution they're causing. However, this again is debatable. I wonder how the govt. would use these funds charged, as I doubt they'd reinvest on roads or on improving the environment.

2. All Toll Plazas to implement a differential rate system, that depends of number of people in a car. Single occupancy is charged at least 4 times, the standard rates, and full occupancy, can be given a discount (say 50%). This doesn't hold much merit. Why should a person be penalized for having lesser occupants in his car? What if the toll plaza is way of someone who is going to his office? Should that person be taking 3 more individuals, just to pay less? This doesn't hold for a wise practice.

3. Firmly implement a steep Congestion Charge in central areas of all metros. This is debatable.

4. Incentivize heavily, those who go in for small fuel efficient cars, and tax heavily those who go in for fuel guzzlers. Remove all Tax on Two Wheelers, and Electric Vehicles. Again, this is debatable. By way of earlier discussions and logic, if a family of 5 decide to buy an SUV, to save space over 2 cars and to comfortably carry all 5 individuals at one go, without more than 1 car, would that person agree to be penalized for buying an SUV that is not economical. His immediate arguement would be for the govt. to make or allow entry of fuel efficient SUV/people carrier.

Just my thoughts....
The comments made in-line are just my thoughts, and not argurements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AutoNoob View Post
Here in Chennai, I've seen on big person (politician actually), who owns 2 SUVs, 1 MUV and 3 cars. Members in his family : 4. Here I am not pointing to any particular person or class, just giving a real life example.

I admire the vision of Mr. Tata for the Nano, because he was worried for a family of four riding a bike in rainy season. But I hate that dad who gifted his two daughters two Nanos on their birthdays for commuting college
The politician must be shot. lol What a classic case of providing beyond ones' requirement. Terrible!

Like some other wise gentlemen had posted, the case of getting more than 1 car, because one can afford, is a good example of why we need to increase the tax for more than 1 car. But of course, if the family where the 2 daughters have their own parking space for it, then we don't have much ground to blame them on. Except, adding to the increase of cars, which have a result on traffic and pollution.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhi_Automobile View Post
Another thing I noted are the parking charges. Some of the mediocre parkings charge tend to charge a lot of money. For e.g. a Parking at Brigade/Residency road junction in Bangy will set you back by Rs 50/- for 3 hrs, on a holiday. And you get to park in unpaved barren mud. Clearly, the govt doesn't have a clear standing instructions for how much the junta should be charged. If the private owner is charging so much, why should the govt allot him the contract anyway. All this coz the govt is a party to all what happens.
Abhi_A, Rs.50 for 3 hrs has got to be one of the lowest charges for parking a car somewhere safely, barren kaccha road or otherwise. Not t realizing the rate is cheap is one thing, but expecting tarrted, flourescent marked parking slots for cheaper rates is going too unrealistic, IMO. No offense meant, but we as car owners have also got to be realistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vina View Post
People very often complain about Rs.50 parking on Brigade road, without realising that even this is probably a subsidised price - just account for the price/rent of land in that area!

It is more the unwillingness of people to pay the true costs (rather than govt. planning - which is bad too) that leads to the problems of congestion.
Well said, Vina. And yes, people able to afford cars complaining about Rs.50 parking, is unfair and unrealistic. Isn't it a small price being paid for safety of the car, being parked in a legal way and safer from being parked on random streets?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AutoNoob View Post
The point I wanted to make further is that since builders can no more sale the 'reserved parking'. Rather as per the judgment there is nothing like a 'reserved parking', its just a 'common area' which anyone may use to park his/her vehicle.

If one family in society goes on to buy cars on 'per member' basis they may not even think twice before parking their cars in 'others' parking area, and thereby creating more chaos, and altercations will definitely be everyday routine.
I haven't read the entire article to understand the case and it's verdict, but if it is indeed the judgement, then it's a bad one, as it will only compound to confusion, chaos and daily arguement. A reserved parking for every flat sold, is a much better practice, then keeping it a free-for-anyone common space. Like AutoNoob has pointed, imagine a household having 2-3 cars, parking at their own free will.


Brilliant thread. Makes for some very healthy debates and exchange of ideas.

Last edited by Technocrat : 3rd May 2011 at 00:45. Reason: Only 3 smilies per post please. Thanks
k_ajay is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2011, 18:19   #80
BHPian
 
vinya_jag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bengaluru
Posts: 342
Thanked: 163 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rajushank84 View Post
We could say, only people who have parking spaces in their homes should buy cars. But that logic has a huge flaw. No one will buy a car to keep it parked at home. They buy it so that they can DRIVE it somewhere. So the "parking at home" factor does not solve the problem at all.

I was trying to search and find out about whether or not it is legal to park a car in a residential area. Every house owner puts a "NO PARKING" sign in front of their gate, and even if they don't, they come for a fight saying "Dont park in front of my house.". Whether it is legal or not is secondary in India, actually. What will they do to the car if you still park there? That is the question.

So the question naturally comes up, from a car owner's perspective: "Where ARE we supposed to park, when going into the city anyway?"
The retort also comes up from a non-car-owner: "Why should that be everyone's problem? Its your car. Who asked you to commute in your own car?"
Parking at home:
Make sure you have enough parking space in front of your house. [If not inside]. The car should not protrude into the road. If it does, then it would disrupt traffic. Make sure you don't have a coconut tree right above your car.
If you have neither, then find a better house. If its your own house, build a garage for your car.

Parking when you are outside:
When you want to park your car in a busy commercial area, look out for no-parking boards. [You would invariably end up coughing fine in Bangalore]
Parking in front of somebody else s gate is a NO-NO. You are causing nuisance to the house owner if you are doing so. Parking a Sedan would be difficult as it might not fit in between the gates of a house. A hatchback would do fine in such cases.
Everybody owns a car these days, and everybody wants to take their cars out on weekends. It would choke all those commercial areas. So you will end up parking your car very far. A big Plus as you can walk the distance.

If your car is still parked in front of a gate/house with a no parking sign:
You might end up without air in all your tyres. Worse, you have scratches on all body parts.


The bigger problem is daily commute: Home-Office-Home
The government is supposed to solve this problem first.

Weekend errand commute is probably a secondary problem. Building parking lots is a good idea but is far from being a reality. So the best bet would be to park your car in a nice place far away from the shopping area [City as you call it] and walk.

Weekend commute in Bangalore is a real hassle. So we take the 2 wheeler to our nearest shopping destination. This would save drive time as well as parking woes.
vinya_jag is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2011, 18:58   #81
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ghaziabad/Hyderabad/Mysore
Posts: 1,416
Thanked: 313 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by AutoNoob View Post
The point I wanted to make further is that since builders can no more sale the 'reserved parking'. Rather as per the judgment there is nothing like a 'reserved parking', its just a 'common area' which anyone may use to park his/her vehicle.

If one family in society goes on to buy cars on 'per member' basis they may not even think twice before parking their cars in 'others' parking area, and thereby creating more chaos, and altercations will definitely be everyday routine.

So, even the previous 'security' of having your 'own parking' is not available, whether you have only one car or multiple, unless you can take your car into elevator and park inside your flat, as shown in Hyundai i10 Uber Cool adv .

As for your friend who took the builder to court may realize later that she could get the money back/ or avoided paying, but she (including other residents of society) may not have a parking space, which can be called 'reserved parking'.

Therefore this judgment may result as Catch-22, till common sense prevails. 'One should not pay for parking space, but on certain days may end up without a place to park, as the neighbour came home early than him'.

The only way is to pray to God that the builder has provided atleast 1 parking space for each flat and every family in that society has atmost 1 car. Oh God !!!

Cheers !!!

My friend was in Karnataka, the law in question (MOFA) wouldn't apply - all the judgement does is clarify the law in a narrow case of a dispute between a society and a builder.

Also societies are legal entities that can grant the use of common areas (I believe - but I'm not a legal expert) by themselves to specific flats owners - or prescribe/restrict/ration the use of common area in a manner equitable to all flat owners.

Also, if the builder did spend money (e.g. even put a gate and walls in the stilt parking, provided a few amenities like locker, electricity board etc.) - it becomes a garage and the whole judgement falls apart.
vina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2011, 19:06   #82
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ghaziabad/Hyderabad/Mysore
Posts: 1,416
Thanked: 313 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by k_ajay View Post
...


If you ask me, the govt. is entirely at blame, for not building car parking complexes, in every major street, that is a commercial shopping area. Not the fault of car owners or residents [we are both right], but the Govt.

...
I agree with you completely except here. Govt.'s fault is not that it doesn't provide parking - govt.'s fault is that it doesn't enforce the requirements when it gives out subsidised land (e.g. Garuda Mall in Bangalore made less parking than it was required to).

I have a solution (many are already following) - don't go near a commercial place where you know you wouldn't find parking. Instead patronise their competitors.

Language of lost income is one that is understood by all.
vina is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2011, 20:06   #83
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ghaziabad/Hyderabad/Mysore
Posts: 1,416
Thanked: 313 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by k_ajay View Post
...

I haven't read the entire article to understand the case and it's verdict, but if it is indeed the judgement, then it's a bad one, as it will only compound to confusion, chaos and daily arguement. A reserved parking for every flat sold, is a much better practice, then keeping it a free-for-anyone common space. Like AutoNoob has pointed, imagine a household having 2-3 cars, parking at their own free will.
...
I read the part Autonoob posted - first of all the decision applies only to Maharashtra (MOFA= Maharashtra ownership of flats act), second SC was giving an opinion on the specific act under a very specific scenarion (rights of builder vs. society) - it is not clear whether the court put any restrictions on how society may prescribe to use the area. third Maharashtra legislature can reverse the judgement anytime by making a different law (provided the new law is not unconstitutional).
vina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2011, 23:18   #84
BHPian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: .
Posts: 479
Thanked: 111 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

No! We ( most of us here ) cant live without owning them. As long as you can park them all inside your own space I do not think there is any issues with that is it? If you have cant do that perhaps one should consider moving away from the maddening crowds! I would.
YaeJay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd May 2011, 00:29   #85
BHPian
 
AutoNoob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NCR
Posts: 208
Thanked: 207 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by vina View Post
My friend was in Karnataka, the law in question (MOFA) wouldn't apply - all the judgement does is clarify the law in a narrow case of a dispute between a society and a builder.

Also societies are legal entities that can grant the use of common areas (I believe - but I'm not a legal expert) by themselves to specific flats owners - or prescribe/restrict/ration the use of common area in a manner equitable to all flat owners.

Also, if the builder did spend money (e.g. even put a gate and walls in the stilt parking, provided a few amenities like locker, electricity board etc.) - it becomes a garage and the whole judgement falls apart.
Vina, following are my observations based on my interest in legal system and public administration. I am no expert, so if you have/ get some different views on this matter, I am all ears.

I'll share my understanding with you.

First of all I agree that the civil appeal was indeed for Maharashtra (and therefore MOFA was discussed). But if you read through the complete judgement (which I did to give some initial info to one of my friends while he was making a deal for flat), the definitions and citations for various terms (like flat, garage, parking, common area etc) are generic in nature and can be applied anywhere. Judges and lawyers do cite the international judgments and world-wide acceptable definitions for relevant co-relation to the case in question, yet they are completely free to make their own suitable inferences in specific situations, particularly if its in the context of Indian society or system.

Societies are definitely legal entities, but not judicial, and even if they are, they have to abide by the ruling of the apex court of the nation. Yes, I do agree that the common area should be allowed for equitable use. And no where the judgement denies/ restrains that. The only problem arises is about the practicality of how to maintain that equality. Therefore I said "this judgment may result as Catch-22, till common sense prevails. 'One should not pay for parking space, but on certain days may end up without a place to park, as the neighbour came home early than him'."

Secondly, once a judgement is written by the Honourable Supreme Court, it can be taken as a direct reference in a similar dispute anywhere in India. (There may be very few exceptions like for J&K where there are some constitutional restrictions for people from other states with regard to ownership of property - Article 370.) So, your friend, whether in Karnataka or any other state, can definitely get a strong support by citing this judgment, and I think the lawyer must have added the same in the case papers.

Lastly, if the builder puts a gate and walls in the stilt parking (even if not the other amenities), then he completes the definition of the garage (which the judges have discussed in detail while writing the judgment) and then he is allowed to charge for that. But in the case that was presented to the court, the definition of garage was not complete (as in most of the societies that we see around), therefore the judgement came.

Thanks.

Last edited by AutoNoob : 3rd May 2011 at 00:32.
AutoNoob is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 3rd May 2011, 00:55   #86
Distinguished - BHPian
 
Technocrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mid West
Posts: 14,896
Thanked: 2,477 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by phamilyman View Post
I dont know in your case, but in most cases, people don't plan for parking any cars in the house - everyone assumes that God/government will freely provide parking when rates in South Delhi are at 30k-50k/sqft
Pray, please tell me whats the job of Municipal & town Planning commissions in each city? No I dont expect them to do it all for free & more so for old areas but why cant they plan effectively even in the new areas of City?

Why cant they create Innovative parking places (Basement/Lift based etc) even for the crowded areas, when there are other cities in the world who do it just fine?

While I understand that this is more of a social responsibility & to an extent may be an individual one too, how much can an individual achieve if there is no help from the govt which is expected to provide for the Infrastructure?

If they are not smart enough there are provisions for them to make visits to foreign countries & learn.

MH State Foreign Tours Policy
Technocrat is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 3rd May 2011, 00:58   #87
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ghaziabad/Hyderabad/Mysore
Posts: 1,416
Thanked: 313 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

I think my response earlier was so brief - it bordered on curt. I'm sorry about that - not my intention. Let me clarify below from whatever legal/constitutional knowledge I have (probably less than yours):

Quote:
Originally Posted by AutoNoob View Post

First of all I agree that the civil appeal was indeed for Maharashtra (and therefore MOFA was discussed). But if you read through the complete judgement (which I did to give some initial info to one of my friends while he was making a deal for flat), the definitions and citations for various terms (like flat, garage, parking, common area etc) are generic in nature and can be applied anywhere. Judges and lawyers do cite the international judgments and world-wide acceptable definitions for relevant co-relation to the case in question, yet they are completely free to make their own suitable inferences in specific situations, particularly if its in the context of Indian society or system.

You are right about almost everything you have written - however this case is different. Constitutionally only SC can interpret laws (not even legislature - that actually wrote the law - has the power. Though SC does take cognisance of deliberation in arriving at a particular law while interpreting its meaning) when a dispute arises over the definition of a particular law. Also SC has the appellate authority over HC's decisions.


Also Judges/Lawyers are not completely free - in fact they are not free at all. They have to work under the bounds of constitution always and also by the laws that legislature makes unless the latter are deemed unconstitutional - to determine the latter and to interpret constitution judges do take cognisance of international precedent when local law is unclear (this is the basis of case-law system we follow) . None of this is relevant in the case in question.

The case in question is over a dispute between two parties (a builder and apparently a society) over charges the builder is trying to levy over residents for parking. The builder (justly) seems to have lost. The dispute was over the interpretation of MOFA taken by the builder and the society. As long as the relevant law is in force SC's interpretation will stand. However if the legislature changes the law - then the new law will be applicable from the date of passing of the new bill.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AutoNoob View Post

Societies are definitely legal entities, but not judicial, and even if they are, they have to abide by the ruling of the apex court of the nation. Yes, I do agree that the common area should be allowed for equitable use. And no where the judgement denies/ restrains that. The only problem arises is about the practicality of how to maintain that equality. Therefore I said " this judgment may result as Catch-22, till common sense prevails. 'One should not pay for parking space, but on certain days may end up without a place to park, as the neighbour came home early than him'."


You are right about the chaos the judgement can cause. Someone else commented on it too. My take on it - if you (somehow) talk to the judges who gave the judgement they might actually agree and then tell you how stupid this law is - that doesn't mean they can change it. Their job is to interpret the law (and tell whether it is constitutional), not make the law.

Also SC itself will probably treat this particular judgement very narrowly. MOFA is a very big piece of legislation, amended umpteen times. Rights of builder, rights of societies and rights of flat owners etc. are defined separately. the relationship between the builder and society is not the same as that between the society and the individual flat owners within that law due to obvious reasons. Hence the judgement may not even be relevant when it comes to actual ownership of the parking space once the building is in society's hands.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AutoNoob View Post


Secondly, once a judgement is written by the Honourable Supreme Court, it can be taken as a direct reference in a similar dispute anywhere in India. (There may be very few exceptions like for J&K where there are some constitutional restrictions for people from other states with regard to ownership of property - Article 370.) So, your friend, whether in Karnataka or any other state, can definitely get a strong support by citing this judgment, and I think the lawyer must have added the same in the case papers.


Each law has its own jurisdiction. You must think about why the name of the law contains "Maharashtra" - the relevant statute is a state subject and each state is free to make its own laws - SC can not do anything about that. SC may invoke MOFA in case of a similar dispute in Karnataka (for example) if the law in question in Karnataka is not clear, and if it is similar otherwise to MOFA. If the Karnataka legislature (not govt. - they are different things even if people think they are same) makes a very clear law then SCs hands are tied as long as that law is not unconstitutional.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AutoNoob View Post


Lastly, if the builder puts a gate and walls in the stilt parking (even if not the other amenities), then he completes the definition of the garage (which the judges have discussed in detail while writing the judgment) and then he is allowed to charge for that. But in the case that was presented to the court, the definition of garage was not complete (as in most of the societies that we see around), therefore the judgement came.


you are right. I mentioned this to point out that the judgement can easily be circumvented in Maharashtra itself, without even amending MOFA.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AutoNoob View Post


Thanks.

I don't think this judgement harms the interests of the residents vis-a-vis the parking situation. Also the honorable SC has time and again shown a willingness to solve problems (where it could find any leeway with the govt.) rather than complicate them - Delhi's pollution and CNG is a case in point.

It is very unlikely that the decision was ever intended to harm the residents' interests or complicate the parking situation in Maharashtra.

Last edited by vina : 3rd May 2011 at 01:02.
vina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2011, 16:33   #88
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 166
Thanked: 147 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rajushank84 View Post
Seriously. Everyone wants to buy a car, everyone goes for it as soon as we are able to afford it. But where is the place to park all the cars?!

My friends in Singapore say the same thing "car buying is only for rich guys" - I can begin to understand why. Its not about the cost of the car, its not the fuel cost. Its the parking.

Long rant.

Thoughts?
Well, your Friends probably say this because it actually is very expensive to own a car in Singapore.

The government has implemented a range of measures to manage car ownership and usage. These include the Certificate of Entitlement (COE), Vehicle Quota System (VQS), road taxes and Electronic Road Pricing (ERP). All motor vehicles must be registered with the Land Transport Authority (LTA).
Effectively the total cost of the car comes to:

Registration fee + Cost Price + Road Tax + COE + additional registration fee (140% of OMV) and customs duty (31% of OMV)
amit_2025 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2011, 20:19   #89
BHPian
 
Delta Wing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hyderabad
Posts: 228
Thanked: 112 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

I could think of this: just put in place rules that there should be no parking on public roads, spaces (except designated parking areas) and enforce the rules ruthlessly. We do get cars towed away in crowded prime roads, don't we? Why not in the residential areas as well? Then, those want to buy/build houses and own cars will have to provide for the parking too. In addition, the vehicle road tax structure for tier I, II and III cities needs to be delinked from the general state tax. Impose a tax based on the ratio of vehicles per population density with tax rising for more density. Then, impose a toll on vehicles registered elsewhere on entering these crowded cities. Then reserve certain roads (where parallel roads are available) only for public transportation system (I'm not talking of BRT corridors) to make public transport faster. These solutions are preventive measures and would only prevent further spread of the congestion problem, for the damage already done, other solutions will be required.

It is constitutionally unfair to deny anyone the right to buy anything they want, in any numbers they want. If people are rich enough to buy ten cars and can provide for their parking in their house, why not? It is also unfair to ask anyone to use a particular means of transportation. If people want to have the convenience of a personal family transport for safety, security, comfort, why not? What can be done is to ensure that the public space is available for the public and not for some to usurp.

Last edited by Delta Wing : 5th May 2011 at 20:20.
Delta Wing is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2011, 20:58   #90
dot
Senior - BHPian
 
dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ban Chang
Posts: 1,681
Thanked: 714 Times
Default Re: Should a few of us stop owning cars?!

Guys, I could not help noticing that most of the discussion is being directed to what authorities can or should do. Which is perfectly all right since they are the ones who are accountable to do their job. But is there something we can do?

We have debated on Public transportation. Everyone agrees that a good public transportation will ease the pain in Indian cities. But it is not in our control.

We have discussed alternate means like bicycle and bikes. Again safety is a big question. Even if we are driving our two wheelers safely, it does not guarantee that others will be kind to us.

Now parking in open spaces, layouts and roads. There is no real answer to this. If a person has enough hard earned financial capability to purchase a Beemer, but no parking place who are we deny him the opportunity? Similarly folks who frivolously prevent others from parking in front of their houses are not really right. I think this is where we can bring about some real changes.

Please tell how we, as individuals, can make the situation better.

Last edited by dot : 5th May 2011 at 21:24. Reason: editing
dot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Shuttle-Cars : An alternative to owning a 2nd Car DukeNukem The Indian Car Scene 12 28th July 2012 18:04
Cars you missed out on owning, and why... SuperSelect Shifting gears 139 27th July 2012 00:27
P220, ZMA or should i wait for few more ? pdev29 Motorbikes 35 20th October 2010 19:09
Few Queries on owning a rarely used Motorbike cool.aquarian Motorbikes 18 18th May 2010 13:38


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 19:36.

Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks