SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Bom) 1066

High Court of Judicature at Bombay
ROSHAN DALVI, J.
Modern India Ltd.
Versus
Belvedere Court Condominium & Others
Notice of Motion No. 1484 of 2013 In Suit No. 711 of 2013
Decided on : 07-05-2014

Advocates appeared:
For the Plaintiff:D.D. Madon, Sr. Advocate a/w. Akshay Patil, Rohan Dakshini, Vineet Unnikrishnan i/b M/s. Federal & Rashmikant, Advocates.
For the Defendants:Zal Andhyarujina a/w. Duhita Lewis, Jariwala, Jyoti Ghag i/b Thakore Jariwala & Associates, Advocates.

The judgment establishes the transferability of apartments under the Maharashtra Apartments Ownership Act, 1970, and emphasizes the reasonableness of restrictions on transfers, highlighting the conflict between Clause 61A and Clause 6 of the Bye-laws.

Headnote:

Bye-laws - Condominium - Maharashtra Apartments Ownership Act, 1970 - Section 2, 4, 5, 6, 61, 62, 67 - The judgment discusses the plaintiff's challenge to resolutions passed in Special General Meetings, focusing on the application of Bye-laws related to membership, transfers, and amendments. The court analyzes the legal rights of the plaintiff and the restrictions imposed by the Bye-laws, emphasizing the transferability of apartments and the reasonableness of restrictions. The judgment also highlights the conflict between Clause 61A and Clause 6 of the Bye-laws, ultimately granting relief to the plaintiff in terms of prayer (a) (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv).

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff challenges resolutions passed in Special General Meetings, seeking injunction against the defendants from acting upon those resolutions and restraint upon levy of charges, fees, contributions, and non-occupancy charges. The plaintiff desires to sell 7 apartments and challenges the addition of Clause 61A to the Bye-laws, imposing restrictions on the sale, assignment, or transfer of units without prior permission of the Board.

Finding of the Court:

The court analyzes the Bye-laws, emphasizing the transferability of apartments and the reasonableness of restrictions. It grants relief to the plaintiff in terms of prayer (a) (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv), and orders the defendants to file their written statement within 30 days.

Issues: The issues revolve around the plaintiff's legal rights, the reasonableness of restrictions imposed by the Bye-laws, and the conflict between Clause 61A and Clause 6.

Ratio Decidendi: The judgment establishes the transferability of apartments under the Maharashtra Apartments Ownership Act, 1970, and emphasizes the reasonableness of restrictions on transfers. It also highlights the conflict between Clause 61A and Clause 6 of the Bye-laws, ultimately granting relief to the plaintiff.

Final Decision: The court grants relief to the plaintiff in terms of prayer (a) (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv), and orders the defendants to file their written statement within 30 days.

Judgment :

1. The plaintiff has challenged the resolution passed by defendant No.1 in the Special General Meeting held on 23.09.2012 and 23.03.2013 and sought an injunction against the defendants from acting upon those resolutions. The plaintiff also seeks restraint upon levy of charges, fees, contributions and non occupancy charges sought from the plaintiff. The Notice of Motion is for the relief of injunction against similar acts. The defendants have essentially opposed the grant of injunction from acting upon the resolution which came to be passed in the meeting held on 23.03.2013. The plaintiff's legal right in respect of the reliefs claimed would have to be considered.

2. The plaintiff developed the suit property and put up construction of a building consisting of Ground + 39 upper floors comprising 78 apartment. The plaintiff has sold 71 apartments under individual deeds of apartments and retained 7 apartments which the plaintiff desires to sell. The plaintiff formed a condominium under Maharashtra Apartments Ownership Act, 1970 and submitted a declaration submitting the same to the provisions of the Act under Section 2 thereof. The declaration specifies inter alia that the administration of the condominium in accordance with Bye-laws annexed thereto.

3. Clauses 5 & 6 of the Bye-laws relate to members and new members of defendant No.1 association, the relevant parts of which run thus:

5. MEMBERS OF THE ASSOCIATION:

(a) All persons who own and/or have purchased from the Grantors (plaintiff) any residential unit in “Belvedere Court” and which has been submitted to the provisions of the said Act;

(b) The Grantor who has retained the ownership of certain units which will belong to them and their successors intitle.

All the above persons shall automatically be members of the Association .... ….

6. NEW MEMBERS OF ASSOCIATION:

All subsequent Purchasers or subsequent owners of any residential apartment in “Belvedere Court” (i.e. persons other than the members mentioned in clause (5), shall prior to purchasing the residential apartment, make an application to the Board to be accepted as a member of the Association. Such application for membership shall be accompanied with all information as required by the Board. Upon the Association in Special Meeting approving the membership of the subsequent purchaser-applicant and upon the purchaser-applicant becoming the lawful owner of the residential apartment, the Board shall include such purchaser-applicant as a member of the Association......

4. Clause 5 of the Bye-laws shows the Members of the Association. They are:

(a) persons who have purchased their residential units from the plaintiff (shown as the grantor therein) and who owned those units (defendants and other such members) and

(b) the grantor who has retained ownership of certain units which will belong to the grantor or its successor-in-title (plaintiff).

71 out of 78 flats having been sold, 71 members fall under clause 5(a). The remaining 7 members fall under clause 5(b) as they are excepted from Clause 6. 71 members are the purchasers of those 71 flats. All of these are members of the condominium. Under clause 5 they would automatically be the Members of the Association.

5. Clause 6 relates to the New Members of the Association or subsequent purchasers and subsequent owners of residential flats in defendant No.1. These are required to make an application to the Board to be accepted as a Member of the Association prior to purchasing any residential apartments. Their membership had to be approved in a Special Meeting. This did not apply to the persons mentioned in Clause 5.

6. Chapter VIII containing Clauses 61 & 62 relate to Transfers, the relevant parts of which run thus:

CHAPTER VIII

TRANSFERS, ETC.

61. Notice to Association: An owner who transfers mortgages or demises his unit, shall within 30 days of the date of the document notify in writing the Association through the Manager, if any, or the president of the Bo



















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top