High Court of Judicature at Bombay
ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.
Marathon Next Gen Realty Limited & Another – Appellants
Vs.
The Competent Authority, District Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies & Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 11802 of 2013 with Civil Application Nos. 3068 of 2013 & 1780 of 2014
Decided On : 18-04-2015
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged an order and certificate issued by the Competent Authority under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, allowing an application for deemed conveyance of a property. The petitioners argued that the application was incomplete and that the Competent Authority exceeded its jurisdiction.Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Competent Authority had not properly considered the written agreement between the parties and had overlooked the need for clear description of the property. The court also noted that the Competent Authority's jurisdiction is limited and cannot adjudicate disputed facts or interpretations of clauses.Ratio Decidendi:
The court emphasized the importance of the written agreement between the parties and the need for clear description of the property. It held that the Competent Authority must consider the reason for delay in filing the application and the existing provisions of law. The court also highlighted that the Competent Authority cannot adjudicate disputed facts or interpretations of clauses. Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the Competent Authority for reconsideration.1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.
2. The Petitioners-Owners-Developers of land bearing Survey No. C.S. No. 2/142, Veer Santaji Lane, Opposite G.K. Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai, admeasuring 35499.83 sq. mtrs. (“the whole land”) have challenged order and certificate dated 22 November 2013 passed by the Competent Authority (Respondent No.1) under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (for short, “MOFA” ), thereby allowed an Application filed by Respondent No.2 –a Co-operative Housing Society Ltd (`the society' ) for unilateral deemed conveyance of the whole land by overlooking the fact of incompletion of remaining projects/buildings named `Innova' and `Icon' and others, which are also part of the whole land. The entitlement/rights of members of other apartment/flats as they have agreed to be governed by the provisions of Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970 (for short, “MAO”) are also required to be taken into consideration while passing such order.
3. The Petitioners commenced development on the whole land and have constructed four wings of the residential tower known as Era I, Era II, Era III and Era IV some time in the year 2004-2008. The development on the part of land is in progress and so also construction of other buildings. The whole project is still incomplete. The commencement certificate is issued by the Bombay Municipal Corporation (BMC) on 05.02.2004. Various agreements for sale have been entered into between the individual apartment owners in the residential tower and P-1 during these years. The schedule of property is provided in the agreement. The relevant clauses are as under:
“10. It is expressly agreed that the right of the Purchaser under this Agreement or otherwise is restricted to the said Premises and remaining part of the Larger Property shall be the sole property of the Owner. The purchaser confirms and consents to the Owner surrendering (at an appropriate stage, after completion of the development of the entire project) the Larger Property to the provisions of the Maharashtra Apartment Act, 1970 (“the Apartment Act”) and constitute the flats in the two wings of the Residential Tower, Era I and IV and the car parking spaces in the podium as a condominium of apartments and each of the flat/car-parking as “an apartment.”
“11. The Purchaser agrees to join in the scheme of condominium of holders whereby the Owner shall surrender the residue of the Larger Property admeasuring 27803.72 Square Meters or part thereof, referred to in recital (iii) above, as indicated in red outline on the Plan, Annexure 'A' hereto, and the buildings thereon, including the two wings of the Residential Tower, Era I and IV, all the common amenities of the Residential Tower, Era I, II, III and IV to the operation of the Apartment Act. The Owner shall after surrendering the Larger Property to the operation of the Apartment Act and at any appropriate stage thereafter execute in favour the Purchaser a Deed of Apartment conveying the said Premises and the proportionate share and amenities in the common areas of the Residential Tower, Era I, II, III and IV. As a holder of the Apartment, the purchaser shall be entitled to the benefit of the common Recreational Ground at the ground level and on the podium level, internal Road use between points 1-2-3-4-5-6 to be used jointly with other occupants/users of the layout as shown on the plan annexed and club house usage on payment of fees.”
“18. The Purchaser confirms that he/they are aware that the development being undertaken by the Owner of the said Property is extremely large and that the completion thereof may take a long time. Accordingly, the Purchaser agrees that he/they have no objection to the Scheme under the Apartment Act, as indicated hereinabove, being put into effect only after completion of the entire development”…..............
4. On 21.12.2009, th
P. Malaichami v. M. AndiAmbalam and ors.
Pappu Sweets and Biscuits and anr. v. Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow
Shiv Kumar Chadha v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.
Credit Suisse Vs. Allerdale Borough Council (1996) 3 WLR 894
Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad Vs. Orient Fabrics (P) Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.