Advertisement

Owner Responsibilities in Mumbai

  • Jeeva Sajan
Chapter

Abstract

Multi-owned property features prominently in the strategic planning documents of rapidly growing global cities. Mumbai, the most populous commercial city in India and one of the most heavily urbanised metropolitan regions in the world is no exception to this trend. The Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority (MMRDA 2013) forecasts a population of twenty-five million in its metropolitan area by 2025. Urban (2012) notes, due to topographical constraints, Mumbai has a large share of multi-owned developments compared to other cities of India. So we could assume this increased housing demand is likely to be met by more multi-owned developments. In this chapter, I examine the evolution of multi-owned developments in Mumbai and associated responsibilities through home-ownership models in either housing cooperatives or in condominiums, and situate Mumbai within the international context.

References

  1. Anand, N., and A. Rademacher. 2011. Housing in the Urban Age: Inequality and Aspiration in Mumbai. Antipode 43 (5): 1748–1772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Appadurai, A. 2000. Spectral Housing and Urban Cleansing: Notes on Millennial Mumbai. Public Culture 12 (3): 627–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bharuchal, N.K. 2013. High-Rise Building Maintenance Cost Pushes Slum Dwellers Back into Their Jovels. The Times of India, June 13. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/High-rise-building-maintenance-cost-pushes-slum-dwellers-back-into-their-hovels/articleshow/20572301.cms. Accessed 15 Sep 2015.
  4. Census of India. 2011. Table for Urban Agglomerations. http://www.censusindia.gov.in. Accessed 21 Oct 2015.
  5. Christudason, A. 2008. Legislation Affecting Common Property Management in Singapore. Property Management 26 (3): 207–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Collective Research Initiatives Trust (CRIT). 2007. Housing Typologies in Mumbai. http://downloads.lsecities.net/0_downloads/House_Types_in_Mumbai.pdf. Accessed 15 Sep 2015.
  7. Cooperative Housing International. 2015. About India. http://www.icahousing.coop/. Accessed 21 Oct 2015.
  8. Cooperative Housing Societies Manual. 2012. https://sahakarayukta.maharashtra.gov.in. Accessed 21 Oct 2015.
  9. Easthope, H., and B. Randolph. 2009. Governing the Compact City: The Challenges of Apartment Living in Sydney, Australia. Housing Studies 24 (2): 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fisher, R., and R. McPhail. 2014. Residents’ Experiences in Condominiums: A Case Study of Australian Apartment Living. Housing Studies 29 (6): 781–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ganapati, S. 2001. Institutional Potential of Housing Cooperatives for Low-income Households: The Case of India. Habitat International 25: 147–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ———. 2008. A Century of Differential Evolution of Housing Cooperatives in Mumbai and Chennai. Housing Studies 23 (3): 403–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ———. 2010. Enabling Housing Cooperatives: Policy Lessons from Sweden, India and the United States. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34 (2): 365–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act (MAOA). 1970. https://housing.maharashtra.gov.in. Accessed 21 Oct 2015.
  15. Maharashtra Housing Area Development Authority (MHADA). 2008. https://mhada.maharashtra.gov.in. Accessed 25 Oct 2015.
  16. Maharashtra Housing (Regulatory and Development) Act. 2012. https://housing.maharashtra.gov.in. Accessed 25 Oct 2015.
  17. Maharashtra Ownership Flat Act (MOFA). 1963. https://housing.maharashtra.gov.in. Accessed 21 Oct 2015.
  18. Mukhija, V. 2006. Property Readjustment and a Tenants’ Cooperative in Mumbai: Some Lessons and Questions. Environment and Planning A 38: 2157–2171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA). 2013. https://mmrda.maharashtra.gov.in. Accessed 11 Oct 2015.
  20. Nijman, J. 2006. Mumbai’s Mysterious Middle Class. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 30 (4): 758–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Patel, S.B. 2005. Housing Policies for Mumbai. Economic and Political Weekly 40 (33): 3669–3676.Google Scholar
  22. Rao, N. 2013. House, But No Garden. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schill, M.H., I. Voicu, and J. Miller. 2007. The Condominium Versus Cooperative Puzzle: An Empirical Analysis of Housing in New York City. The Journal of Legal Studies 36 (2): 275–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Singh, V. 2014. Mumbai Housing Societies Go Hi-tech with Online Community Portals. The Times of India, September 15. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Mumbai-housing-societies-go-hi-tech-with-online-community-portals/articleshow/42485287.cms. Accessed 11 Oct 2015.
  25. The Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. 1960. https://housing.maharashtra.gov.in. Accessed 19 Oct 2015.
  26. The World Bank. 2010. Working with the Market: Approach to Reducing Urban Slums in India. http://indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/Working%20with%20the%20Market.pdf. Accessed 19 Oct 2015.
  27. Urban, F. 2012. Mumbai’s Suburban Mass Housing. Urban History 39. Accessed 19 Sep 2015. doi: 10.1017/S0963926811000812.
  28. Whitehead, J., and N. More. 2007. Revanchism in Mumbai? Political Economy of Rent Gaps and Urban Restructuring in a Global City. Economic & Political Weekly 42: 2428–2434.Google Scholar
  29. Wissink, B. 2013. Enclave Urbanism in Mumbai: An Actor-Network-Theory Analysis of Urban (dis)connection. Geoforum 47: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeeva Sajan
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Architecture, Design and PlanningUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations