Price in JP Nagar 8th Phase Royal County

[pn996]

Hi,

Could anyone tell me the going rate in Royal County (BDA layout) in JP Nagar 8th phase?

I am getting different quotes from different agents... Also, is it really true that this is a 70:30 venture between BDA and Royal Developers?

I am negotiating for a plot near the water tank in this area soon.

Thanks in advance,
pn996.

[rkrishna]

4-5 months back I was getting agent quotes from 3.2 K to 3.5 K depending on the location/facing of the plot
I think Royal County, Royal Lakefront and Royal park residency are all from the same developer. For Royal Park residency, BDA tried to acquire land but the land owners managed to get a part of the land denotified. Land owners with the BDA's approval, developed the layout through a developer and were required to give back 30% of the sites to BDA. I am guessing that royal county may be similar. I was looking for sites that were allotted from BDA directly as the developer allotted sites did not have the GPA from land owner to developer registered in some cases.

[agopal]

pn996,

What is the range of quotes you are getting from the agents ?

[pn996]

One of them was quoting 3,500/sqft and another was quoting 4,200/sqft for sites in the same area (2-3 roads from each other).

[agopal]

Thanks pn996. 4.2K is really expensive for 8th phase, I feel. Did you finalize upon a plot ?

[jackalbda]

The 2-3 road difference can make a hige difference in this area...one might be Proper BDA plot and the other one Royal County BDA approved plot. For get about 2-3 roads, in the same lane itself, I see this difference.

[rkrishna]

What is the difference between proper BDA plot and Royal County BDA approved plot? The only difference may be the GPA between the landowner and the builder. Other than that everything else is same right?

4200 Rs seems high given that it is not close to any main road like banerghatta road or kanakapura road which will have metro in future. Access to Bghatta road is also not that great and the area is in early stages of development

[jackalbda]

As far as I know, an original BDA property means , the title clarity is more. Any disputes about the title, can be questioned in a court of law , only back to the time from when BDA has taken it over. In case of a BDA approved plot, all it means is , BDA is fine with the way the area is developed and in normal case, it might not interfere this area for any future development plan . It does not give any clarity about the title .

[rkrishna]

I doubt that this applies to Royal county. AFIK about this layout, the land in this layout was to be acquired by BDA. The acquisition did not go through within the specified time period by BDA. In such cases, the land owners can develop the land provided they earmark 30% of sites for BDA and follow the BDA norms. BDA can allot these sites directly. Rest of the 70% land the owners sold through a developer.

So there is no difference in ownership chain for BDA sites and developer sites. The only difference that I can see is that land owners would have entered into a GPA with the developer. One needs to check whether the GPA is registered.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor have I seen Royal county papers. Anyone who has verified with the papers of this layout with a lawyer should confirm that the above holds for that layout

[rkrishna]

Just to clarify: there is certainly a difference between BDA acquired lands and lands acquired by others. In some society's which are BDA approved, the land was originally acquired by BDA and then allotted to society. Then the society developed the layout with BDA approval. AFIK, these should be as good as direct BDA allotted sites in terms of clarity of ownership chain up to allotment. (unless otherwise it is proven that the society illegally got the lands from BDA)

There are other society's where the society directly acquired the land from owners. Here there can be questions around ownership chain. Even if the layout is BDA approved, it can be deemed to be one level of quality lower than BDA allotted land. I guess what <jackalbda> mentioned will apply more in this case.