Can a real estate developer skip the number 13 as it is considered unlucky? Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MAHARERA) believes that not after the building plan is approved.
The regulator had recently addressed the complaint of a housing society near Mumbai alleging that the developer had changed the apartments on the 13th floor to numbers 1401, 1402 and so on, effectively erasing number 13 from the building. According to the society, the change created a mismatch between the approved plans and on-site numbering, leading to discrepancies in official records and property tax documents.
Maharera’s comments
MahaRERA observed that if the developer believed the number 13 to be unlucky, he should have included it in the design of the building before seeking approval for the plans.
MahaRERA said, “If the defendant (developer) knew that the 13th floor is considered inauspicious, the defendant could have taken steps to avoid constructing flats on the 13th floor by preparing a plan accordingly. After obtaining approval from the concerned authority on the plan, the defendant cannot believe that the 13th floor is considered inauspicious, hence, the flat numbers are not numbered in the 13 series.”
The regulator further said that the developer is bound to follow the approved plans under Section 14(2) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. It added that if residents of flats above the 13th floor face any problems in future due to the numbering discrepancy, it will be the responsibility of the developer to fix them.
However, MahaRERA noted that, since the project was already completed, there was no question of stopping the developer from implementing the revised numbering by a permanent or temporary injunction. It also clarified that the RERA Act does not empower the authority to give compensation in such cases.
The authority observed that if the housing society feels that the project has not been constructed as per the approved plans, it should approach the competent authority that issues the occupation certificate, as that authority is responsible for certifying that the project is in accordance with the approved plans.
Accordingly, MahaRERA dismissed the complaint and did not pass any order regarding costs.
Also read: MahaRERA rejects investor’s refund claim, says RERA applies only to genuine home buyers
Case
Among several allegations against the developer, a housing society near Mumbai told MahaRERA that although the sanctioned plans showed a 13th floor, the developer numbered the apartments on that floor as 1401, 1402 and so on, effectively abandoning the number 13. The society alleged that this is a deviation from the sanctioned plans and a violation of Section 14(2) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Also read: Delayed possession: Can a real estate developer seek review of MahaRERA order in favor of the home buyer?
How did the housing society know about the missing 13th floor?
According to the housing society, the matter came to light when residents received property tax bills from the municipal corporation and found that the addresses of flats on the 14th floor and above did not match the numbers used in the building.
The society told MahaRERA that the physical number 1401 of the apartment located on the 13th floor was shown as Flat 1301 in the property tax bill, while the physical number 1501 of the apartment located on the 14th floor was recorded as Flat 1401. It said similar anomalies were present in all buildings on the campus.
The society alleged that upon contacting the Municipal Corporation, it learned that the property tax bills were issued as per the sanctioned building plan. It alleged that the developer unilaterally omitted the number 13 while numbering the floors and apartments, resulting in a mismatch between the approved plans and the numbering used at the site.
According to the society, the discrepancy has affected over 300 residents, leading to discrepancies between sanctioned plans, on-site flat numbers, registered property documents and municipal property tax records.
developer defense
The developer informed MahaRERA that omitting the number 13 is a common industry practice as it is widely considered inauspicious.
‘It is common industry practice for developers to omit the number 13 as it is widely considered inauspicious and hence, while the 13th floor exists from an approval and structural point of view, it is labeled as the 14th floor in the numbering scheme of the building,’ the developer submitted before MahaRERA.
The developer also argued that the property tax bills issued by the municipal corporation show the same nomenclature used in the building.
Also read: Can real estate developers deduct money if a home buyer cancels a flat booking within two days due to home loan concerns?
Maharera’s comments
MahaRERA observed that since the housing society had raised the issue of missing 13th floor along with several other complaints, the matter could not be dealt with as part of a common complaint. The Authority held that the issue involved individual relief, which cannot be decided in a complaint filed collectively by the housing society on behalf of all its members.
MahaRERA said, “The said allegation of the complainant (housing society) does not pertain to the common area, hence the society cannot agitate for its violation. Therefore, no relief can be granted in this regard.”
