A building owned by a co-operative housing society is exempt from repair cess under section 83(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976.

JUDGMENT - ASHOK AGARWAL, J.:---A short question that arises for consideration in the present petition is, whether the property owned by the petitioner co-operative society, is liable to repair cess or is exempt therefrom. Petitioners are a co-operative society which was formed after the erstwhile tenants of the building had purchased the same from its erstwhile owners. The said society was formed and registered on 28th February, 1979. Prior to the registration of the society, the said building was liable for payment of repair cess as the property then vested in the erstwhile owners. After the building was purchased by the tenants and after the tenants formed themselves into a society, they claimed exemption from payment of repair cess in view of the provisions of section 83(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the 'MHADA Act'). The said plea did not find favour with the respondents and the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 issued a notice bearing No. D/3/87-88 (at Exhibit-F to the petition) claiming repair cess. The same is impugned in the present petition. As far as the registration of the petitioner society is concerned, the same, it appears, has been registered as a general society. Though this may be so, in our view, it squarely falls within the definition of "co-operative society" as defined in section 2(12) of MHADA Act. Section 2(12) provides, as under :--

"2. In this Act, unless the context requires otherwise, --

(12) "co-operative society" means a co-operative housing society registered or deemed to be registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960."

Similarly, petitioner society falls within the definition of "Housing Society" as defined under section 2(16) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. Section 2(16) of the said Act provides as under :

"2. Definitions. (16) "housing society" means a society, the object of which is to provide its members with open plots for housing, dwelling houses or flats; or if open plots, the dwelling houses or flats are already acquired, to provide its members common amenities and services;"

In our view, petitioner society would not fall within the definition of "general society" as defined under section 2(15) of the said Act, which provides as under :--

"(15) "general society" means a society not falling in any of the classes of societies defined by the other clauses of this section;"

2. Since petitioner society falls within the definition of 'housing society' it will not fall within the category of general society and this will be so despite the petitioner society being described as a 'general society' in the registration certificate issued in favour of the petitioner.

3. Section 83(1)(g) of the MHADA Act exempts lands and buildings vesting in, or leased to a Co-operative Housing Society. Since the building in question, vests in the petitioner Co-operative Housing Society, the said building, in our view, is exempt from repair cess.

4. Reliance, however, is placed on behalf of the respondents on a decision of a Single Judge of this Court in the case of (The Beacon Co-operative Premises Society Ltd. and another v. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and others)1, in Writ Petition No. 864 of 1987 decided by S.H. Kapadia, J., on 16th of June, 1992. In our view, the facts of that case were entirely distinct from the ones arising in the present petition. In that case, it was the case of the society therein that it was a premises society and its building was not exempt from levy of repairs cess. Based on the contentions, repairs had been carried out to the building of the petitioners therein. When a stand contrary to the one mentioned above was taken by the petitioners therein, after having had the benefit of the repairs being carried out by the Repair Board, it was found that the said building was not entitled to exemption.

5. In the instant case, the consistent stand taken up by the petitioner, after the society was r

Click Here to Read the rest of this document