10 April 2023 Business Laws >> Business & Commercial Law   |   Consumer Complaints >> Civil & Consumer Law   |   RTI – Right to Information >> Miscellaneous  

A recent court judgement in Kerala has settled the debate over parking fees charged by Lulu Mall. The case involved two separate writ petitions filed by citizens challenging the legality of these fees.

The crux of the issue was whether Lulu Mall could charge for parking spaces provided as per mandatory regulations. The court ruled that the mall can indeed collect fees for the basement parking area, which fulfils the minimum parking requirement. However, the judgement added a crucial distinction for a separate multi-level parking facility on the mall's premises.

The court acknowledged that while the mall is obligated to provide a certain number of parking spaces, this doesn't translate to free usage for visitors. The mandatory parking provision aims to prevent vehicles from clogging roadsides, not to offer complimentary parking. Additionally, the court recognized that maintaining the parking space incurs costs for the mall, justifying the collection of fees to offset these expenses.

The key takeaway for the mall's management lies in the distinction made for the multi-level parking facility. This separate structure, not considered part of the mandatory parking requirement, requires a different license for collecting fees. The court specified that a license under Section 475 of the Kerala Municipality Act is necessary for the multi-level parking, whereas the existing license under Section 447 suffices for the basement area. This judgement clarifies the legal standing of parking fee collection by Lulu Mall. The mall can continue charging fees in the basement parking as long as the proper license is in place. However, it must obtain a separate license under Section 475 if it intends to collect fees from vehicles parked in the multi-level facility.

KERALA MUNICIPALITY (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2003    

Right to Information Act, 2005