The strict adherence to the provisions of MOFA by promoters and the requirement to implead necessary parties for a complete and final decision.

JUDGMENT :

1. Vasant Complex Cooperative Housing Society Ltd, registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 instituted Short Cause Suit No. 396 of 2007 against M/s. Renuka Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. (Defendant), a promoter within the meaning of Section 2(c)of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (In short 'MOFA' Act) for enforcement of obligations under Section 11 of the MOFA.

2. Pending suit, the promoter (Defendant) sought impleadment of Mahendra Jayantilal Vora and two others as defendants in the suit in Chamber Summons No.771 of 2013. The learned Trial Court allowed the Chamber Summons vide order dated 19th December, 2014 and directed the plaintiff to carry out consequential amendment in the plaint as well as notice of motion on record, within fourteen days from the date of the order. It is against this order, the proposed defendants have preferred this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

3. Before I deal with the contentions of the petitioners, let me place on record relevant facts for deciding the present petition. One Mrs. Verna Jovita Nagpal, was owner of the property bearing Survey No.163(Part) and CTS No.128 Part admeasuring 29,680 square yards equivalent to 24,752.65 sq.mtrs. (hereinafter called 'Larger Property'). On 24th December, 1981, Mrs. Verna Nagpal (Owner) executed an agreement whereby agreed to sell and said Mahendra Jayantial Vora and others agreed to purchase the said larger property for consideration on certain terms and conditions therein contained. It appears that by an agreement dated 29th November, 1991, Mahendra Jayantilal Vora and others agreed to sell to ('Vendors' for short) M/s. Renuka Builders (Promoter/defendant no.1), five portions of said larger property, more particularly described therein for consideration upon certain terms and conditions (Hereinafter referred to 'Subject property'). Defendant M/s. Renuka Builders then constructed, in all, 14 buildings on the Subject Property consisting of 516 shops and flats. By the agreement dated 29th November, 1991, vendors therein agreed to execute conveyance as well as other documents in favour of Renuka Builders or their nominees including cooperative society or condominium of apartments without any delay or default. Clause No.38 of the agreement dated 9th November, 1991 reads as under:

“38 The Vendors agree to execute conveyance or conveyances as all other deeds, denouements or nominees including any cooperative society, limited company of condominium of apartments as may be required by the Purchasers without any delay or default. It is agreed that any persons or party nominated by the Purchasers shall be deemed to be the Purchasers in the place and stead of the Purchasers herein without any consent or concurrence from the vendors in that behalf.”

4. M/s. Renuka Builders thus in terms of the rights derived under Agreement dated 29th Day of November, 1991 developed the subject property by constructing 14 buildings in all and executed agreements with the flats/shop purchasers. All these agreements are subject to provisions of the MOFA. Thus it is the case of Plaintiff that Defendant/Promoter, under the agreement with the flat purchasers is under the statutory obligation as per Section 11 of the MOFA to take all necessary steps to complete his title and convey to the society of the flat purchasers his right, title and interest in the said land.

5. Mr. Godbole the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ordinarily, impleadment of a party to the suit, either proper or necessary is at the instance of the plaintiff but in this case, defendant-promoter, sought impleadment of the petitioners, which according to Mr. Godbole is contrary to the scheme of the Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (In short 'CPC'). Mr. Godbole further submits that execution of consent arbitral award dated 26th January, 2000 be