Open and stilt parking can't be sold like a flat, the Supreme Court held. Check your parking promise

Rules as of 13 October 2026.

Open parking and stilt parking are not "flats" or "garages" that a Maharashtra builder can sell for a price, the Supreme Court held in 2010. The builder's only right is to recover the cost, shared in proportion to carpet area. The ruling is Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd. v. Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., decided on 31 August 2010 by Justices R.M. Lodha and A.K. Patnaik. It matters most when a builder lists "car park: ₹X lakh" in your agreement.

What the case was about

The promoter sued to stop a Dahisar society in Mumbai from interfering with its possession of 25 stilt parking spaces. The trial court dismissed the suit, the High Court dismissed the appeal, and the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals too, with no order as to costs (paragraph 42).

What the Supreme Court held under MOFA

• A stand-alone garage is not a "flat". The words "and includes a garage" in the definition of flat in the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA) cover a garage only as part of a flat (paragraphs 28 to 29).
• Open and stilt parking are not "garages". The Court read a garage as a covered space with a roof and walls on three sides (paragraphs 35 and 36).
• They are common areas. The Court held that "stilt parking space/open parking space of a building regulated by MOFA" is part of the common areas and facilities, relying partly on the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970 (paragraphs 37 to 39).
• The promoter can only recover the cost. In the Court's words, "the only right that the promoter has, is to charge the cost thereof in proportion to the carpet area of the flat" (paragraph 39).
• Buyers' undertakings did not help the promoter. Undertakings that the promoter could sell parking spaces "are neither binding on the flat purchasers nor the society" (paragraph 41).

The RERA position

The Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs FAQ on the central RERA Act says open parking is part of common areas and "cannot be sold to the allottees" (Q11). It says a garage, meaning a covered space with a roof and walls on three sides, "can be sold to the allottee independent of the apartment" (Q16). The FAQ does not address covered parking that is part of an apartment. The FAQ says it is for general guidance and is not a final legal interpretation.

Where the law is not settled

Do not read the 2010 judgment as a blanket ban. It dealt with stilt and open parking under MOFA, and it did not say who the buyers of the disputed spaces were; the promoter's counsel had argued that spaces would be sold only to flat buyers in the layout. A commentary in LiveLaw (an author's opinion from 2017) argues that the Court's remarks apply to sales to outsiders and that the position for sales to the building's own flat buyers is arguable. It also notes that spaces enclosed on fewer than three sides stand on a different footing. We have not found a later Supreme Court ruling that resolves this, so builders may still price open or stilt parking separately, and a buyer who objects may have to contest it. Whether a particular charge is allowed is a question for an advocate.

Worked example: cost recovery versus a "parking price"

Assume (illustrative) a building has 25 stilt slots that cost the builder ₹50,000 each to build, so ₹12.5 lakh in all, and the flats have a total carpet area of 40,000 sq ft. Recovering that cost in proportion to carpet area is ₹312.50 per sq ft. A 600 sq ft flat would share ₹1,87,500. If the same builder prices one slot at ₹4 lakh in your agreement, the difference is ₹2,12,500 on a single flat. These numbers are assumed for the illustration; ask for the actual basis of any parking charge.

The parking promise trap at possession

The trap is a vague promise. An agreement may say "two car parks" without saying which, where, or what type. At possession you may find a slot that is open, a stack or mechanised unit, or one that a car cannot actually enter. To avoid this, write the details into the agreement.

Ask for	Why
Slot number and level	Stops a later swap to a worse slot.
Type: covered garage, stilt, open, podium or mechanised	The law treats a covered garage differently from open and stilt parking.
Marking on the sanctioned plan	Shows the slot exists in the approved layout.
Price line and basis	Cost recovery under Nahalchand or a separate sale price.
Dimensions and access	Check a car can enter and turn.

Why the details matter after possession

The Dahisar dispute shows how long a parking fight can run: the case reached the Supreme Court in 2010 after a trial court and a High Court had both ruled against the promoter. Most buyers cannot afford that. A clause that names the slot, its type and the basis of the charge gives you something concrete to point to if the society or the builder later disagrees. It also helps your housing society, since the Court treated stilt and open parking as part of the common areas shared by all members, and a society that has to sort out who may park where will look first at the agreements.

Checklist before you sign

• Read the parking clause and the price schedule together.
• Compare the number of slots in the plan with the number of flats.
• Ask whether the slot will be handed to the society as common area after conveyance.
• Keep a copy of every brochure or email that promised parking.

Mistakes to avoid

• Signing for "parking as available" or "one reserved car park" with no number.
• Assuming an extra payment gives you ownership of an open slot.
• Accepting an undertaking that lets the builder sell parking later: the Court said such undertakings do not bind buyers or the society, but disputes take time.

This article explains the law and does not replace advice from an advocate.